QuestionGuy
Do you feel Mcdonalds should’ve been punished in the 90s for lying about the hot coffee lawsuit and spreading misinformation about frivolous lawsuits? Why or why not?
Do you feel Mcdonalds should’ve been punished in the 90s for lying about the hot coffee lawsuit and spreading misinformation about frivolous lawsuits? Why or why not?
12 Comments
Leave a ReplyLeave a Reply
You must be logged in to post a comment.
Absolutely. If I remember, they actually hired PR people to spread misinformation about the victim and even actors to picket the trial.
Yes.
But they should also have been punished for making the coffee that hot just for taste reasons. Burnt coffee is bad.
Duh. They irrevocably poisoned a backstop of consumer protection
Yes. They should have been fined with obstruction of justice as it served to delegitamize the victim’s case outside of the court room, thus potentially tampering with juror opinion.
the hot coffee thing sounds like a joke, but a lady was seriously maimed
They should have been crushed by the Monopoly game lies.
I thought Rockstar sorted the hot coffee mod on Grand Theft Auto San Andreas
They were punished. It’s called punitive damages
It wasn’t really McDonald’s itself as much as the media that perpetuated the myth that that lawsuit was frivolous. The media likes to provoke an emotional reaction and nothing does that like a ridiculous-sounding lawsuit that you can glibly sum up in some ragebaity headline.
This doesn’t at all seem like a randomly generated question from some program or homework. Kinda obscure. Yes, of course, all the detail is fresh in people’s minds.
No.
That doesn’t mean I think they were right, but they were trying to push a certain narrative. I think there were a lot of implications as opposed to blatant lies.
At some point, its just marketing and PR, and unless you want to punish all PR, you can’t really punish that one.
No. McDonalds didn’t put the coffee between her legs.