1E9Ct5D

statements were attributed to one of the two major political parties, or to Proctor &Gamble, participants got suspicious; they wondered whether the sun has red spots andisn’t “really just yellow,” and they wondered if a newborn camel really would be biggerthan a bull mastiff. Ariely’s team also found that consumers were far less suspicious ofproduct claims attributed to neutral sources, such as Consumer Reports, thanstatements made by companies, even ones with well-respected brand names. 81For businesses and large organizations, and for the lawyers who represent them, thoseresults present an obvious problem. Most jurors are inclined to be suspicious abouteverything such parties say concerning their products or their actions.How do we deal with that? We have to talk about people, rather than the company orthe government agency or the union that is our client. We have to let the jury see realpeople, people they like and trust and respect, sitting in the courtroom and explainingwhat they did and why.The lawyers who defend businesses have long believed that having a good corporaterepresentative sitting at counsel table was essential. It still is, and probably always willbe, even though it may be losing some of its effectiveness. Studies from the Universityof Michigan and San Diego State University reveal that “college students’ self-reportedempathy has declined since 1980, with an especially steep drop in the past 10 years”and “during the same period students’ self-reported narcissism has reached newheights.” 82If the next generations of jurors will be narcissistic and lack empathy, that81 Ariely, supra note 42 at 262-64.82 Jamil Zaki, “What, Me Care?” Scientific American Mind 14 (January/February 2011).37