A classic example of what could be described as
Leaping Impact Muckraking, and by some standards Truncated Muckraking is that
of the woman in 1992 who sued McDonalds over her spilling their hot coffee.
Most people who have heard of this lawsuit immediately identify McDonalds as
the victim as it was ruled in court for the woman to be awarded over $2.5
million dollars. What the media failed to disclose were the details and
complexity of the lawsuit, and what exactly Mrs. Liebeck was looking to achieve
in her suing of McDonalds.
The New York Time’s 16th “Retro Report” tells the story of Stella Liebeck, the 79 year old woman from Albuquerque, New Mexico who, in 1992 spilled eight ounces of McDonalds’ hot coffee into her lap. According to Liebeck, her daughter, and her attorney, this spill resulted in severe burns on 16% of her body and a week’s stay in the hospital, complete with skin grafts and a $10,000 hospital bill. Upon her release from the hospital, Stella wrote to McDonalds with two requests. First of which being compensation for her medical bills, secondly for the fast food chain to reduce the holding temperature of their coffee from 190 to 180 degrees. As Stella herself states, “She just didn’t want anyone to have to go through what she had to”. McDonalds sent her a payment of about $500, so Mrs. Liebeck brought them to court. After a long trial and arduous trial, the jury decided that McDonalds was to award Mrs. Liebeck of $2.7 million, although in the media amounts ranged from $2.5 to $2.7. The fact of the matter is that the media took the story, only to pick and choose what information they wanted to air to the public. The story became so popular and satirical that it can still be found in modern television and music.
The reason that this story could be classified in some instances as either Leaping Impact Muckraking or Truncated Muckraking is because of the way the occurrence and trial played out and what the results were. By the end of the trial and the ruling in favor of Liebeck, there wasn’t necessarily and new legislation that restaurants were required to label their coffee as hot, but it did result in restaurants and other establishments providing this label. This labeling is in an effort to avoid a similar lawsuit such as that put forth by Lieback. Another result of the media coverage and muckraking over this lawsuit was the negative light that was cast onto Stella Liebeck, if the media had reported over the full story and not just taken it for face value, perhaps the public would understand the whole story between McDonalds and the 79 year old woman who spilt their coffee in her lap.
I highly recommend watching the short (12 minute) video in the attached link, I found it to be quite informative and enlightening to such a famous lawsuit:
Scalded by Coffee, Then by News Media
