Warning to those in fast food industry
 

As anyone should know here I am not given to forwarding stuff, which are usually chain stuff and bogus.

This is not something I have been asked to forward, it was something in the US I stumbled across, but there is a theoretical danger of copy-cats.

The danger affects anyone who works in the fast food industry, and here is the link to an article and the full video of a news report about this incident

Another article about this case

Basicaly a hoax caller passed himself off as a police officer and got an assisatant manager to strip search a female employee who was falsely accused of theft, and then while the employee was naked, left her with her fiance who on the instructions of the hoaxer, sexually assaulted her.

This hoax had been hitting a number of establisments in the US.

I have no evidence that this ever hit the UK, but as a victim once of an attempted hoax, should this occur is to try and ring back the agency ever making such a call, which is what I did in 2001.

Maybe my previous experience is why this case affected me so much when I read it.

PS as a former Cyber Devil's Advocate to McDonalds UK, I have brought this case to their attention and am awaiting their response.

Is anyone out there knowledgable of employment law in the UK, could an employer have the authority to conduct a strip search.

Absolutely not.

Incidentally I have now spoken with one of the regular people at the McDonalds I go about this case so at least they are aware of the hoax, and from what he was saying it sounded like he had come across it as well.

I have also spoken about this case at my local branch of Caffe Nero, to both the manageress and the assistant manageress. Both gave me the impression that they would not fall for this hoax and the assistant manageress says she would refuse to be subject to such a search or inflict it upon anyone.

The problem is the findings of the Milgram Studies at Yale in the 1960's


I suspect a lot more people would fall for this than they realise, especially if like the Louise Ogborn case the hoaxer researches his target very well.

I was reviewing this case, and some of the comment some people made were depressing. If you can put on an air of authority you can make people do anything, this was the finding of the Milgram studies.

If you look up the Milgram experiment on Wikipedia, this case is referenced as a real world example.

Right, because when some guy calls claiming to be a police officer and orders you to strip someone naked because she's been accused of theft you'd better do what he says!

What idiots!

Sadly, people, as in this case do comply.

If you watch the video, when the assistant manager was challenged that some might think she was naive, her response was along the lines of, "You did not receive that phone call". The perpetrator used authority, and what happened is what Professor Milgram predicted from his studies.

Mama will keep a look out thanks

...Her fiance sexually assaulted her, cos someone told him too? ....

If you read up on the Milgram experiment, you will see it is not surprising.

It is also rather scary, if someone exudes authority, they can make ordinary people do obscene things.

Getting back to the case in hand, the last that was said that I can find is that McDonalds in the US were considering an appeal against the $6.1M settlement awarded against them.

Anyone been able to find out if they did appeal?

The case was decided in early October of 2007

I have studied the Milgram experiment at length and shan't go into the criticisms of it.

The case you've given is extreme, and words cannot describe how sensationalist and reactionist it is.

This is the Ogborn case in a bit more detail, with a more detailed analysis of how it compared with the Milgram experiment.

Also if you want to look it up, there is the Standford prison experiment which had to be stopped.

If we wanted, we could find experiments and studies which ward someone off doing ANYTHING. Including; breathing and eating.

The moral panics and those who induce them don't help at all.

We can't wrap the World in cotton wool. There are dangers with living in this World, and the only way we're safe from them is by... well... not living.

But I thought, that we could better protect those that serve us our fast food by educating them about this, should there ever be a copy cat, which thankfully so far, has not happened.

Perhaps you could give a summary of the critique, possibly in another thread if need be. It was quite a disturbing study as was the experiment in Stanford which had to be abandoned.

No problem. I'll stick to it here cos they're short and very easily explicable so don't require much thread.

With Milgram, the experiment was good cos it was scientific and operationalised, using prompts to serve as a measurable way for participants to continue.

However, the study of obedience lacked one major thing - the ability for it to be applied to the general public and the "outside World" shall we say. Oftentimes, Psychology studies/experiments are specifically conducted with the outlook to be able to apply the findings to the outside World so that we further understand human behaviour. However, this particular study - the findings can ONLY be applied to those participants who took part in the study. This is because the surroundings of the experiment were artificial, and the experimenter had manipulated variables in a way that meant whatever findings were discovered, could not have been applied to real life situations. The laboratory in which the experiment was based in also served this purpose, ensuring that whatever was discovered from the experiment couldn't be said that would happen in the real world. In short, the experiment lacked ecological validity.

Secondly, and perhaps most importantly - we can explain the behaviour of the participants using another extraneous variable. That is, demand characteristics. What this means is that participants were fully aware they were taking part in an experiment and so adjusted their behaviour to fit in with what they thought may be asking of them to do. For example, cues in the environment and the study suggested that the experiment was looking at authority/obedience, and so they adjusted their behaviour in order to make "findings" with what they found appropriate. The thing this study lacked, is that it could not categorically state that in real life, under the same pressures/cues, that a human would act the same. Henceforth, we again cannot apply the findings to the general population OR this case that you have posted Sticks.

Lauren always speaks clever. makes me feel dumb :sad:

she also hits me :laugh2:

*thwacks* No I don't :rolleyes:

....:hug:Kidding!

Well I'm lost, what exactly has this got to do with the "fast food industry" in particular? thats assuming this was ever replicated here in the UK, personally i think its got no chance.

I can't for the life of me see anyone dumb enough to strip naked in front of someone of the opposite sex without proper identification or having someone else presant, without even being charged with anything whilst in the UK.
Of cousre if people are that stupid I dont suppose any warnings will work, but what the hell has this got to do exclusively with McDonalds and the like?:shrug:

The hoaxer targeted fast food stores because they have a certain culture of "By the book" and "Do as you are told". In the longer extended article I believe it does go through that.

It looks like the Milgram studies have been repeated


Nothing ever changes

Incidentaly I wrote to McDonalds UK about this via their Q&A site, and this was the result

I asked
They replied

I find it disturbing that McDonalds UK were unaware and have no procedures should this happen here. It is fortunate that there has been no copycat action on this side of the pond.

There was a study/tv show where these people are in a prison, half are the prison wardens and the others are prisoners, and they live like that for few months. At first the wardens are on the same level due to it "not being real". Well over time the wardens became tough and should little respect for the prisoners, the uniform had taken control as the wardens became more brutal over time....

thats based on Zimbardos stanford prison experiment which Sticks mentioned. I dont see how it relates to this hoaxer though. I can see maybe they would do the strip search if they didnt know the law, but the sexual assualt bit!? wheres this info from again, they could be anyone! Spanking? lol wtf? this doesnt seem for real and if it was it would have been on some kind of national news/papers surely

Well done Lauren:thumbs: exactly this was an experimental situation and its likely they would have had in the back of their mind that they wouldnt seriously harm anyone surely! aswell as doing what they thought was expected of them etc. I dont think it can be applied to real life. The Zimbardo study could be to an extent people taking on roles and what not, but I dont really see how that was happening here I mean what was the spanking all about? That isnt anything that normally happens when police conduct their enquiries haha, they could maybe get away with a strip search but flippin heck this cant be real!

Sadly it was real

The Fiance was sentance for sexual assault, even though he was following the authoritative voice on the telephone. The CCTV captured everythings.

From what I can see, for the caller this was about control and the ability to make people do this, and to some extent practicing it by proxy, sort of like controlling a Sim character.

What happened in this case was that the demands were escalated by increments. The spanking was because Louise disrespected the fiance in the eyes of the caller.

If you want to see evidence of this process of obedience, look to the phishing hacks that are done. If people did not fall for them, then they would not be sending these things out.