"Surely you have to question all of these as being true?"
an email I got a little while ago....
"2005 STELLA AWARDS!!!!!!!!Time once again to review the winners of the Annual "Stella Awards." The Stella Awards are named after 81 year-old Stella Liebeck who spilled hot coffee on herself and successfully sued McDonald's (in NM). That case inspired the Stella Awards for the most frivolous, ridiculous, successful lawsuits in the United States...."
Yes, you always have to question!
This is an example of how only seeing one side of an issue can horribly misrepresent the truth, and is a lesson on both the importance of fair and balanced reporting and how misleading "truthiness" (thank you Steve Colbert) can be.
Check this out: http://www.lectlaw.com/files/cur78.htm
"it held its coffee at between 180 and 190 degrees fahrenheit..."
"liquids, at 180 degrees, will cause a [third degree] burn to human skin in two to seven seconds..."
"a burn hazard exists with any food substance served at 140 degrees or above, and that McDonalds coffee, at the temperature at which it was pouredinto styrofoam cups, was not fit for consumption because it would burn the mouth and throat. The quality assurance manager admitted that burns would occur, but testified that McDonalds had no intention of reducing the "holding temperature" of its coffee..."
"McDonalds produced documents showing more than 700 claims by people burned by its coffee between 1982 and 1992. Some claims involved third-degree burns substantially similar to Liebecks..."
"A vascular surgeon determined that Liebeck suffered fullthickness burns (or third-degree burns) over 6 percent of her body..."
Have a lower opinion of McDonald's?
Have a higher opinion of the lawyer who spoke up for the victim who spent eight days in the hospital?
"2005 STELLA AWARDS!!!!!!!!Time once again to review the winners of the Annual "Stella Awards." The Stella Awards are named after 81 year-old Stella Liebeck who spilled hot coffee on herself and successfully sued McDonald's (in NM). That case inspired the Stella Awards for the most frivolous, ridiculous, successful lawsuits in the United States...."
Yes, you always have to question!
This is an example of how only seeing one side of an issue can horribly misrepresent the truth, and is a lesson on both the importance of fair and balanced reporting and how misleading "truthiness" (thank you Steve Colbert) can be.
Check this out: http://www.lectlaw.com/files/cur78.htm
"it held its coffee at between 180 and 190 degrees fahrenheit..."
"liquids, at 180 degrees, will cause a [third degree] burn to human skin in two to seven seconds..."
"a burn hazard exists with any food substance served at 140 degrees or above, and that McDonalds coffee, at the temperature at which it was pouredinto styrofoam cups, was not fit for consumption because it would burn the mouth and throat. The quality assurance manager admitted that burns would occur, but testified that McDonalds had no intention of reducing the "holding temperature" of its coffee..."
"McDonalds produced documents showing more than 700 claims by people burned by its coffee between 1982 and 1992. Some claims involved third-degree burns substantially similar to Liebecks..."
"A vascular surgeon determined that Liebeck suffered fullthickness burns (or third-degree burns) over 6 percent of her body..."
Have a lower opinion of McDonald's?
Have a higher opinion of the lawyer who spoke up for the victim who spent eight days in the hospital?
posted by John Derrick | 6:16 PM
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
<< Home