Day 012 - 18 Jul 94 - Page 49


     
     1        A.  OK.
 
     2   Q.   This is the Texas one, April 24th 1987?
              A.  Yes.
     3
         Q.   The first paragraph, we need not trouble with, except it
     4        says that the campaign is deceptive and that McDonald's
              must immediately cease and desist further use of the
     5        advertisements.   Then I would like you to look at the
              second paragraph:  "The reason for this is simple:
     6        McDonald's food is, as a whole, not nutritious.  The
              intent and result of the current campaign is to deceive
     7        consumers into believing the opposite.  Fastfood customers
              often choose to go McDonald's because it is inexpensive
     8        and convenient.  They should not be fooled into eating
              there because you have told them it is also nutritious.
     9        McDonald's calculated move to promote its food as
              nutritious is a giant step backward from the gains made
    10        last summer when McDonald's at the insistence of our three
              states and together with the other major fastfood
    11        restaurants, agreed to provide booklets to its   customers
              giving the nutrition facts on its food.  With these
    12        booklets consumers can make their own decisions whether or
              not to eat at McDonald's - and what to eat when they get
    13        there.  The new campaign appears intended to pull the wool
              over the public's eyes.  Let's consider a few specific
    14        claims made in your ads", then we need not read on.
 
    15   MR. JUSTICE BELL:  May I just ask what the situation is, if you
              can say, in an Attorney General's department, a state
    16        Attorney General.  The signature there would actually be
              Mr. Mattox's signature, would it, or not?
    17        A.  Yes, that is Mr. Mattox's signature.
 
    18   Q.   In this country if a solicitor acting on behalf of a local
              authority, as we call them, it would have county secretary
    19        or whatever at the top which is the chief lawyer for that
              local authority.  It would have a reference which would
    20        perhaps give the initials of the solicitor who actually
              wrote the letter and then someone would write quite often
    21        the name of the county secretary, even though that was not
              the county secretary who had written the letter, or signed
    22        it, do you understand?
              A.  Yes, I do.
    23
         Q.   I notice there is no reference or none on the copy I have.
    24
         MR. RAMPTON:  No, your Lordship is right; there is not.
    25
         MR. JUSTICE BELL:  It looks like a rather different way of 
    26        operation.  That would actually be signed by Mr. Mattox 
              himself? 
    27        A.  Yes, most of them, my Lord, are signed by his
              assistant, Mr. Gardner, whose name, Mr. Gardner is under
    28        signature, but then also I believe it says "for the
              Attorney General" or some reference to show that he is
    29        ----
 
    30   Q.   But if I see Jim Mattox that is actually Jim Mattox?
              A.  Yes, that is correct, yes it is.

Prev Next Index