I am, as always, late to the party. I first read about this over at Megan McArdle’s blog. I was going to comment there but ran into Disqus trouble. Then, I remembered Popephat. Of course Patrick was up to the task and did a far better job than I would have ever done. I went by disptaches from TJICistan, where Travis was on the job, pointing us back to Patrick. Maggie’s Farm was on the job too. Most of the writing and most of the comments were directed at the plaintiff in the suit.
I want to mention the attorney based in Dallas that is with the Center for Science in the Public Interest. I wonder what motivates someone to pursue this line of work. Does Mr. Stephen Gardner realize, that if successful, his lawsuit will result in increased costs for what is for many inexpensive entertainment? Does the CSPI really believe anyone is fooled by the advertising? So what if McDonald’s thinks the advertising is effective. My kids want all sorts of crap. I don’t let them have hardly any of what they want. They get what I want them to get. How is that different from any other parent out there?
I’ll let you in on another little secret about advertising: I need a new car. My 13 year old son, I’m certain it’s due to the brainwashing effects of advertising, thinks I need a Lamborghini. He’s right of course.
I’m certain that if you asked Stephen Gardner he would tell you his only interest is in protecting me from giant corporations like McDonald’s. But am I really supposed to believe that? I am similarly situated as the defendant, although my time of being nagged by my children for Happy Meals has passed. Would Stephen Gardner similarly claim he was protecting me from the advertising claims of Kellogg’s? Did I really need him to be worried about me not understanding that a box on the shelf of Walmart that had a bunch of extra tape on it, might have been returned to the store by a previous customer? Did he think it was impossible for me to understand that Walmart might put that swing set back on the shelf? Does he think you and I are that stupid? If he does, I take great offense.
You know, it was never about the toys for me. It was the damn playgrounds! My kids always wanted to go, especially on 100 degree August afternoons, to McDonald’s to have lunch so they could play in those tube things in comfort. I hated having to sit there while they disappeared into that maze! They were having fun and I wasn’t! This, for those of you who don’t remember, was in the days before iphones and ipads and wi-fi. I had to remember to take a book with me! Talk about a hassle.
The way I remember it too was that you would buy the Happy Meal, the kid would hardly touch the food or the toy, and then she would get excercise! Kind of runs counter to the claims of Mr. Gardner.
The whole thing is ridiculous. If all the lawyers out there feel that all the citizens of this great nation have been protected from all harm and wrongdoing such that they are left to sue McDonald’s over Happy Meals, we have too many of them. There is certainly other work where the kind of talent Mr. Gardner has can be put to better use.