Nike uses sweatshops, lies about it, then claims their lies constitute constitutionally protected "free speech"
Thursday, 1. November 2007, 06:48:53
Nike denies the charges of sweatshop conditions, but has chosen to try to avoid court completely on the grounds that its press releases and public statements weren’t ads, and therefore weren’t covered by the California truth in advertising law. Instead, Nike claims the denials were made as free speech, and protected by the First Amendment. Under this argument, whether the denials were the truth or lies is irrelevant.
Read more on Media Vulture
Read even MORE on CommonDreams.org
Read more on Media Vulture
Read even MORE on CommonDreams.org
WIDGETIZE
Carol # 1. November 2007, 10:48