Thanks for spreading the word, Jake! This is one of those stories that people refer to again and again without knowing the facts - so aggravating!

I think it is a prime example of how propaganda is alive and well in the American media.

Oh and I will see you on Wendsday. I might get there around 7:15 or so.

McDonalds Hot Chocolate is nice...then you go into McCafe and have a stupidenously huge Hot Chocolate there and it doesn't require sweetening and you have that card which you stamp 9 times get the 10th medium coffee free.

Needless to say, they will never let me have Hot Chocolate instead of coffee.

Starbucks has kick ass hot chocolate. It is 2 bucks so it is cheaper than coffee but twice the price of McDonalds but it is made with quality chocolate syrup and steamed milk instead of the water and dehydrated milk powder that McDonalds uses.

mmmmm... I love Starbucks hot chocolate.... I don't drink coffee.

I'm not so sure that it's a case of willful propaganda so much as it is lazy reporting. I don't think the media really covered the case as it progressed, so the only things most people remember are the initial charges, which sound insanely frivolous. Many can't even remember all the details, and more often than not those who do remember seem to think the skin grafts were a case of doctored records and ambulance-chaser lawyering. Sort of like a fake neck brace.

It's true that plenty of major media outlets are more beholden to their advertisers than they'd ever admit. I used to work at a paper owned by Gannett, publishers of USA Today, and there was always this weird undercurrent of "don't offend the advertisers." It's an unfortunate side effect of having businessmen run the show.

All the same, though, I wouldn't call this propaganda; they just didn't bother to follow up on the story, which is a damn shame.

Media commentators and pundits bitched and whined about how "lawsuits were destroying the competitive edge of industry" and the GOP was pushing Tort reform as a part of the contract on America. But then I am a web designer and you are a journalist so feel free to bitch about web design.

Point.

See also, "Touché."

I'm inclined to agree with evilninja ... a little. I think the media sensationalizes stories more to draw a crowd than for some evil world domination plan. They need money to keep running. The better their ratings, the more advertising they can attract. The more advertising they attract, the more money they have. It all starts by using more fantastic words (fatal crash versus accident; gaping chasm versus cave), then when that starts to lose it's effect, they simply report on the parts of the story that are most unbelievable or most outrageous. I watch the Fox5 (http://www.fox5dc.com) news simply because it makes me laugh with how obvious and sensationalistic they are. When there's a story that interests me, I'll surf the internet for the facts.

I guess it's almost better to have a marketing degree or psychology degree if you want to be a news person!

I think people found it hard to believe that you would need a skin grafting procedure or that you can even get a third degree burn from hot coffee. I am not so sure you can because I have spilled that coffee on myself before and really havent had to go to the hospital but it gave me a first degree burn.....not a third degree burn. I just dont know because I really dont know the facts and nobody really does exception being the lawyers and people involved in the caSE

Damn. Now I feel stupid. At least Ian admit whe I'm wrong. Well, thanks for the facts, Jake. At least I got onto the front page of 8bitjoystick.com! (Woo Hoo!) And lets all learn a valuable lesson from this: never put hot coffee in your lap! (No matter how warm it is...)

Another part of the equation, ti, is that journalists tend to get bored easily. We see newsworthy stuff firsthand all the time, you see. So a lot of us tend to focus on the more salacious details because it's what we find the most interesting, and we assume that others will find it equally interesting. What we forget, however, is that not everyone is as jaded as we are, and the raw, mundane facts are just as important as the juicier bits. Often more so.

YAY for you for posting this....I've been tellign people all this for years.....:)

YAY

This IS the sterotypical frivalous lawsuit;
the media didn't lie about a damn thing,
except for the reports that DID say the car
was moving when she burned herself.

BUT SO WHAT??? Once that mcdonald's employee
placed that coffee cup in that woman's hands,
it was TOTALLY out of mcdonald's control, just
like the consumer that buys a butcher knife from
a utensil manufacturer and cuts him or herself later with it.... unless those employees THREW hot scalding coffee on that woman, ANYTHING that happened after she got it in her hands was HER fault. PERIOD. If she merely removed the lid and it splashed on her, then it was HER negligence that got it on her, not mcdonald's.

One positive outcome; the populous outcry against this terrible, left-wing socialist piece of crap finding/ruling has begun a large movemement in the country to start ending stupid,
frivalous lawsuits once and for all.

Once you start taking all sense of responsibility away from the individual and forever make ALL misfortunes "somebody else's" fault, you may as well close up shop and go hope, the country has GONE TO HELL.

If this response is deleted, then it's because
i'm telling the truth and you can't stand it.
You can silence the truth, only this post; take
it off and you're just proving everything I said
and making me that much more right.

The media omitted a hell of a lot like how McDonalds treated her in the trial, when she wanted compensation for her surgery costs and the thousands of other cases that they knew about.

This was not a frivolous lawsuit if you actually learn the truth about it. This is a wonderful example about how a pro corporate bias in the media has warped the truth and controlled the minds of the American people with propaganda and advertising.

Not telling the whole truth is a method of lying. Just look at the president.

I think that anyone that believes that it's merely lazy reporting - or that this woman is making this up is willfully deluding themselves. This and many other cases where the media has spun a personal injury case based on corporate negligence have been used as a campaign in what is referred to as tort reform. Tort "reform" in this case meaning that the persons damaged or injured in these cases should have their damages limited by law. This benefits not the general public, but large corporations. Though I can't say that the American public is all that great at acting in its own best interest anyway. Can't wait til Arnie takes away the 40 hour week in my state...hell he's already giving away the farm in the energy scandal.

This lawsuit has been bandied back and forth by interested (but grossly uninformed or misinformed) Americans since it was first "reported" by the media. It's currently about 2:48am PST, and I'm reading all the comments because I was trying to find out who the lawyers were who handled Ms. Gilliam's case against McDonald's. This I'm doing because last July my 16-year-old son had his left great toenail torn off by a faulty door at a Kern County library. When I filed a claim against the county for damages, I was referred to the owner of the building whose insurance company (State Farm Insurance) has (as of yesterday, 12/17/03) offered me a whopping $1,000 settlement. It's a VERY risky prospect going up aginst a California county and a large insurance group combined. I've been up most of the night trying to decide if I have the resources (namely time and money) to take this to court. I'm currently unemployed but I pray this is only temporary. However, once I do go back to work, then I risk losing a new job because of court dates, etc. Any suggestions?

Look just because your kid was playing in the library door and got his toenail caught is no reason for you to sue and bankrupt your local public library. I have had a nail pulled out before and it is a temporary injury. I would suggest that you get over your dreams of cash from a frivolous lawsuit and focus your attention to getting a job.

Couldn't have said it better myself Jake. Regarding the 81-year old, I'm sorry, but so what if she was mistreated by the McMachine lawyers. She screwed up and dropped the '20-degree hotter' coffee, and that's that. That's like the parent's kid who drops the frickin snow cone two feet from the place it was bought, then the parent rants and raves to get another one; and usually wins. It's just plain stupidity.

She had third degree burns. That is when you have blisters, craters and need skin grafs on her legs and crotch. McDonalds knew they were selling a dangerous product and they did not care.

this is WAY late, but i thought id say:

"I think the media sensationalizes stories more to draw a crowd than for some evil world domination plan. They need money to keep running."

the media needs money SO they can be sensationalist, etc. if they feel that they HAVE to be misleading and dishonest, who needs em?