McDonald - The Arthur Page Society

3.2 McLibel
In 1994 a Greenpeace chapter in England accused McDonald’s of peddling food
harmful to human health and well-being. The group had produced a pamphlet entitled,
“What’s Wrong with McDonald’s? What They Don’t Want You to Know.” Some
protestors had then distributed the pamphlet on the streets of London. In a heavy handed
response to this otherwise isolated and unremarkable incident, McDonald’s Corporation
issued writs to five protestors demanding that they either apologize for their statements
against McDonald’s or appear in court as defendants in a libel suit McDonald’s filed
against them. Three of the five protestors agreed to apologize, but two—Helen Steel and
Dave Morris—refused and went to trial. Steel and Morris had no legal representation,
virtually no expense funds, and they were denied their request for a jury trial. 76 Still, the
relatively impoverished and inexperienced defendants managed to put up a substantial
legal argument against McDonald’s in a trial that would run for two and a half years,
becoming the longest-running English trial in history at that time. Although Steel and
Morris failed to prove all the accusations made in the pamphlet were true and the court
ruled in McDonald’s favor, the court of public opinion ruled decisively against the fast
food giant. Two samples of the extensive and damning press coverage of McDonald’s
role in the the “McLibel” suit are shown in Appendix 3.
The McLibel suit presented a tantalizing David-and-Goliath media story that
pitched McDonald’s formidable legal team and million dollars outlay in battle against
two “ordinary” young citizens who represented themselves with little financial support.
The Observer reported that the court case made McDonald’s look like a bully and was, in
sum, a public relations disaster. 77 Steel and Morris then took the British government to
18