unrecognizeable
New member
This was one of the lead stories on the Yahoo! front page this morning. It's about a doctor who was fired from his position in a county health department because of his advertising against unhealthy foods.
Article - "Fla. doc fired over 'doughnuts equal death' sign"
- Thread starter unrecognizeable
- Start date
Scorpiogal
New member
Wow- I guess the truth hurts. I can't believe he was fired over that! I thought it was pretty clever.
KaraCooks
New member
If he were a private physician, I would be more upset about it.
Since he's a government official (or was) and was using a county facility to promote his views, I think he needed to tone it down a bit. One can speak out against something without being intentionally incendiary about it.
There's also some legally shaky ground there for a business or a government to publish something like "[Company Name] = death". I wouldn't blame Dunkin Donuts if they were to sue over it.
Since he's a government official (or was) and was using a county facility to promote his views, I think he needed to tone it down a bit. One can speak out against something without being intentionally incendiary about it.
There's also some legally shaky ground there for a business or a government to publish something like "[Company Name] = death". I wouldn't blame Dunkin Donuts if they were to sue over it.
mylee
New member
BS! What happened to freedom of speech? Just because you're a lawyer with money, and you happen to own a doughnut shop you can make people stop sharing their opinions?? I really doubt Dunkin lost any money because of the doughnut nazi. He may of gone overboard, but I don't think he should of been fired.
Yeah, I think if he'd have stuck to Donuts=death he'd still have the job the 1st time. And freedom of speech still has limits. I think what he was doing was bordering on libel and he needed to tone it down.
That said I hope he gets the job back and continues on his crusade without calling out specific businesses.
KaraCooks
New member
Freedom of speech doesn't mean you're allowed to slander someone.
Let's put it this way. What if you owned a bakery. You made cakes and cookies and pies and sold them. That's how you earned your living.
What if a government agency in your town started posting on their marquee:
Mylee's Bakery = death
Would you sue? Would you make them take it down? Would you ask them to fire the person who kept slandering your business?
What about freedom of speech then?
unrecognizeable
New member
I agree that it was a bit much that he went after certain businesses; that was just asking for it. However, I'd like to see him continue the work to educate people about eating options through a public position.
mylee
New member
Well I guess nobody has freedom of speech then. I guess when they tell you that's one of your feedoms it should come with a disclaimer from now on. And....If I did have a bakery and a "government agency" started posting a sign like that, I really really doubt it would effect my business since I had millions of other bakerys all over the contry. I also really doubt that one of my regular pie eating customers would have an "ah ha" moment by reading a sign. So no. I would not sue. I would probably act like a grown up and accept the fact that no matter what....somebody ALWAYS has something to say.
DISCLAIMER: your mufuggin rights END where mine BEGIN. Get the memo?
Most large companies do this thing called franchising, which means you own a handful of stores at best. And when someone starts attacking one of those stores and you see a serious pinch in that store's income.
But hey, let's make it personal. What if someone you knew went running around telling everyone - quite convincingly - that you were an awful person. Told so many lies you started losing friends and being shunned. Would you still be bitterly defending peoples' "rights" to libel and slander?
KaraCooks
New member
Do you actually understand what the right of freedom of speech is? It sounds like you don't.
You've obviously never owned your own business where word of mouth can ruin you. I'm sorry ... but you really don't know what you're talking about here.
When paying my mortgage and putting food in my family's mouths is put in jeopardy by someone trying to make a point, then yes, I think firing is appropriate. Maybe next time he'll learn not to slander people.
mylee
New member
*sigh* Whatever Kara.
I thought freedom of speech was the right to, I don't know, speak freely!?! I'm not saying he wasn't out of line. I'm saying I don't think he should have been fired. I can see that he did it out of frustration of seeing patients with illnesses that could have been prevented. If you don't agree with me then fine. Shut up about it. You don't have to comment on how stupid you think I am because I've never owned a business....or I don't really know what freedom of speech is. Dunkin Doughnuts or KFC did not sue him, these lawyers that happened to own one of the franchises did. Therefore, you can not convince me that these lawyers did this for any other reason than to make an example out of him. Like I said. I doubt that someone driving down the street, eating a doughnut decided to chuck it out the window after seeing that sign....not gonna happen. I'm really not going to argue about doughnuts anymore unless I get to eat one,so whatever you say.
I thought freedom of speech was the right to, I don't know, speak freely!?! I'm not saying he wasn't out of line. I'm saying I don't think he should have been fired. I can see that he did it out of frustration of seeing patients with illnesses that could have been prevented. If you don't agree with me then fine. Shut up about it. You don't have to comment on how stupid you think I am because I've never owned a business....or I don't really know what freedom of speech is. Dunkin Doughnuts or KFC did not sue him, these lawyers that happened to own one of the franchises did. Therefore, you can not convince me that these lawyers did this for any other reason than to make an example out of him. Like I said. I doubt that someone driving down the street, eating a doughnut decided to chuck it out the window after seeing that sign....not gonna happen. I'm really not going to argue about doughnuts anymore unless I get to eat one,so whatever you say.
ChefChiTown
New member
After reading that article, I think I should remind people that there are two sides to every story. This story is no different.
Side 1...
Dr. Newsom was hired by the state Health Department to educate the public about health issues. That is exactly what his intentions were by using slogans such as "Dunkin Donuts = Death" and "French Fries = Thunder Thighs". He was doing his job by using these advertisements. He was trying to relay a message to the public that would inform them that unhealthy eating would lead to bad results. Technically, that fit into the exact description of his job (informing the public about health issues) and he should not have been fired for such a reason.
Side 2...
Dr. Newsom did something that is known as "slander", which is illegal and can be cause enough to terminate someone from their position, especially if their position of employment is with the state. In Dr. Newsom's case, the state had every right to fire him from his position because he broke the law. He also used Dunkin Donuts' name without their permission, which is against the law as well. If you read the article, you'll notice that Dunkin Donuts wasn't the only company name that he used without permission. He also used KFC by name as well.
So, both sides were right in this case. But, they were also both wrong. Nobody wins this argument - nobody.
Side 1...
Dr. Newsom was hired by the state Health Department to educate the public about health issues. That is exactly what his intentions were by using slogans such as "Dunkin Donuts = Death" and "French Fries = Thunder Thighs". He was doing his job by using these advertisements. He was trying to relay a message to the public that would inform them that unhealthy eating would lead to bad results. Technically, that fit into the exact description of his job (informing the public about health issues) and he should not have been fired for such a reason.
Side 2...
Dr. Newsom did something that is known as "slander", which is illegal and can be cause enough to terminate someone from their position, especially if their position of employment is with the state. In Dr. Newsom's case, the state had every right to fire him from his position because he broke the law. He also used Dunkin Donuts' name without their permission, which is against the law as well. If you read the article, you'll notice that Dunkin Donuts wasn't the only company name that he used without permission. He also used KFC by name as well.
So, both sides were right in this case. But, they were also both wrong. Nobody wins this argument - nobody.
LOL, there's my point about it being personal. You want to champion this guy's rights to free speech, but all Kara did was disagree and you want to void her free speech rights now.
Maybe firing is extreme, but corporate politics is ruthless and he knew the law. If he had managed that frustration and kept names out of his mouth I can promise you almost a snowball's chance in Hades of this still happening.
More like the lawyers retained (owned) by the franchise decided to proceed based off a final decision by the shareholders/corporate infrastructure/ franchise owner. Every business has attorneys and will proceed forth in ruthless fashion against perceived threats that they can legally handle.
If I run around telling everyone you are a bad person but nobody believes me do you not care at all? You're content to let me (ILLEGALLY) slander your good name up until I finally convince someone? How do you know when that happens anyways? What if it affected your income? Do you even have an income?
Now go eat a donut and STILL don't argue.
KaraCooks
New member
No, actually it's not. And I'm not trying to be snide, or pick a fight here. I'm honestly explaining this because it's something that a lot of people say and think. They think that "freedom of speech" means anyone gets to say anything they want all the time any time and no one can get upset.
Here's what "Freedom of Speech" really means:
The 1st Amendment to the Constitution says:
What that means is that the government cannot stop you from speaking your mind. The government cannot silence you. You have the right to say Obama sucks as a president or Bush sucks as a president and you cannot be jailed for it.
What freedom of speech DOESN'T mean is that you can say lies about a person or a company and that person or company can't make you stop. A private person or a private company has the right to protect their reputations and make you stop saying lies about them.
It doesn't matter if they're a great big old company and make billions of dollars or they're mom-and-pop down the street. Our laws say that no one can go around and spread "defamatory statements" about another. And that protection works both ways.
If the doctor had stuck with "donuts = death" he'd have been fine because he wasn't attacking a person or a company. But by putting the name of a company in his announcements, he broke the law. He committed slander.
Now whether he should have been fired or not is a matter of opinion, but the making him stop isn't some random lawyer beating up on an innocent victim. This is a company defending it's reputation and it's part of all of our rights under law. Not just Dunkin Donuts, but yours, mine, and Joe Blow's on the street.
We all have the right to have people NOT spread lies about us. And we have the right to fight legally if someone is spreading lies and won't stop. Those are ALSO part of our rights under law.
mylee
New member
Well thanks again on yet another insightful googled reply Mr. I think I know everything. Yeah. MY opinion. You calling me a bitch on another post and telling me I don't know what I'm talking about.....Is that slander or freedom of speech?? Just trying to sort things out in my big stupid bitchy head.
Please stop quoting me and go irritate the piss out of someone else....I'm over it.
ChefChiTown
New member
http://i30.tinypic.com/20idmbc.jpg
http://i30.tinypic.com/2djrqkk.jpg
http://i30.tinypic.com/2djrqkk.jpg
Jeanette401
New member
If the doctor was working at a personal level and wanted to protest Dunkin Donuts or whatever, more power to him.
Once he moves from acting as a person to acting as an employee off an organization, things change. Freedom of Speech protects his personal right of speech. It does not mean that his employers have no say over how he speaks and acts as their representative.
If I work for Krispy Kremes and I start allocating advertising money to put up billboards that say "Krispy Kremes Taste Like Cardboard!" or "My Boss Joan Smith Is A Dirty Whore" then there is absolutely no right for me to keep my job.
Likewise, freedom of speech doesn't mean I can put an ad in every paper that says "Angeline Jolie Buys Two Year Old For Brad To Abuse". I could rightfully be sued for this.
If I'm getting my employers sued over something like this, again, I don't have a right to keep my job.
While I appreciate that the doctor was trying to promote good health, he should also have understood good sense. He didn't have the right to use his job to accuse Dunkin' Donuts of killing people. He should have just stuck with "Donuts = Diabetes" and left the brand name finger pointing out of it, and he could still be helping people without targeting a specific company. (Although it's very interesting to me that Dunkin's advertising is focusing on their coffee and not their donuts these days)
Once he moves from acting as a person to acting as an employee off an organization, things change. Freedom of Speech protects his personal right of speech. It does not mean that his employers have no say over how he speaks and acts as their representative.
If I work for Krispy Kremes and I start allocating advertising money to put up billboards that say "Krispy Kremes Taste Like Cardboard!" or "My Boss Joan Smith Is A Dirty Whore" then there is absolutely no right for me to keep my job.
Likewise, freedom of speech doesn't mean I can put an ad in every paper that says "Angeline Jolie Buys Two Year Old For Brad To Abuse". I could rightfully be sued for this.
If I'm getting my employers sued over something like this, again, I don't have a right to keep my job.
While I appreciate that the doctor was trying to promote good health, he should also have understood good sense. He didn't have the right to use his job to accuse Dunkin' Donuts of killing people. He should have just stuck with "Donuts = Diabetes" and left the brand name finger pointing out of it, and he could still be helping people without targeting a specific company. (Although it's very interesting to me that Dunkin's advertising is focusing on their coffee and not their donuts these days)
wishes
Coffee Addict
Ooo nice kitties!
Regarding the opsting guys, can you tone it down. Freedom of speech really is a seperate subject here. When a company employs you, be it be state or otherwise, then you need to respect them and never speak out as though you represent them in any way without explicit permission. Even if its a related to your profession at all, there is potential.
If in any way what you do or say, reflects on your employer, then they have a case. I do a lot of talking and blogging on IT stuff, and working in the IT sector im very aware of what i say reflecting poorly on my employer and have tempered my opinions because of it.
Its common sense more than anything. A company has to make money and do business its their prime concern.
In any case, can you guys please take personal feelings and arguments out of the forums, take a few mins to cool down a tad
Regarding the opsting guys, can you tone it down. Freedom of speech really is a seperate subject here. When a company employs you, be it be state or otherwise, then you need to respect them and never speak out as though you represent them in any way without explicit permission. Even if its a related to your profession at all, there is potential.
If in any way what you do or say, reflects on your employer, then they have a case. I do a lot of talking and blogging on IT stuff, and working in the IT sector im very aware of what i say reflecting poorly on my employer and have tempered my opinions because of it.
Its common sense more than anything. A company has to make money and do business its their prime concern.
In any case, can you guys please take personal feelings and arguments out of the forums, take a few mins to cool down a tad