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.
