The text, after the three page intro by Nader, consists of 202 pages with some cartoons as well as section title pages included, followed by a ten page index that includes subjects and publications as well as names.

Mokhiber is the editor of the "Corporate Crime Reporter" and Weissman is the editor of the "Multinational Monitor." The text of the book consists of 60 articles taken from these two periodicals divided into eight sections as follows:

1. Corporate Crime and Violence

2. The Corporate Attack on Democracy

3. The Global Hunt for Mega-Profits

4. Corporation Nation

5. The Big Boys Unite: Merger Mania in the 1990's

6. Commercialism Run Amok

7. Of Sweatshops and Union Busting

8. Do I Have to Arrest You? Corporations and the Law

As a collection of news columns, the book consists of anecdotes with conclusions that tend toward hyperbole, but for the most part are accurate, if a bit emotionalized. Since each article was written for the intended audience of subscribers to the two periodicals (the date is indicated at the beginning of each), they read like they are preaching to the converted. No neoliberal will be convinced of such a statement as:

"Most corporate criminologists agree that corporate crime and violence inflicts far more damage on society than all street crime combined. That includes killings and deaths."

The authors provide no non-anecdotal evidence for what might seem an astounding statement, but I have read widely enough to know that it is essentially true, depending on how you define "corporate crime." This assertion is repeated twice elsewhere, indicating little or no editing before assembly here. A few of the articles are followed by a one or two paragraph update bearing on events that happened between original publication and the date this book went to press. There are no footnotes, and scant reference to any sources for their information. I suppose if you have access to Nexus or something similar, you could do a date-limited search (based on when the article was written) to find out more.

It would have been nice if Mokhiber and Weissman had provided an over-arching introductory essay of, say, 20 pages, giving an overview of the problems involving the ever-increasing expansion of corporate behemoths, drawing a relationship between relative power and systemic greed-driven flaunting of the law, and putting into historical context the privatization of profits and socialization of costs. It was lazy and irresponsible of them not to do this, and that is why it gets only three stars.

The book is a quick and fascinating read, but I recommend you check it out from your local library. That's what I did!

The one-star, long-winded review offered below by Greg Peisert almost entirely misses the point of this rich and rewarding book. Peisert's comment cites low unemployment in the United States, but ignores the atrocious condition of overseas work for American corporations and the proliferation of unlivable-wage jobs here at home. Both of these trends are well-documented in "Corporate Predators". You may also notice that Peisert's refutation of the book is based upon cases in which one corporation succumbs to another; he forgets the subject matter of the book is the treatment of workers by corporations, not the treatment of corporations by one another. As the book documents, the treatment of many workers by their employers has become simply shameful, and much of this trend is due to the rise of de facto corporate government here and world-wide. A book well worth reading, and one that's long overdue.

Mokhiber and Weissman provide plenty of potential fuel for the fire with their insightful discussions on corporate chartering, democracy for sale, and Constitutional abuses. Unlike many, they name names and reference credible sources. Unless the dangers of corporate dominance are addressed, we can expect books such as Corporate Predators to become very popular during the next economic downturn. Read it now and not only avoid the rush, avoid the dangers they point to so well.

These guys are lengends in their own minds but do very little to actually help you. Of course, for 33% they will write letters that threaten like this book. OOOOOHHHHH, I'm not scared!

I've read this book cover to cover, and it is both highly informative and easy to digest. Shernoff shows why he is preeminent in his field as a consumer lawyer, and his book is designed to help people avoid the necessity of going to court. Reading this book could save your life.

Ralph Nader's Foward to this book is a well written, concise presentation of insurance companies evolution from "fiduciaries" to "profit centers". It describes the ineffectiveness of state insurance regulatory agencies and how the lobbying power of the industry managed to secure legislation that circumvented the US Supreme Court ruling that the industry was an interstate business subject to federal regulation. The remainder of the book contains simple, clear explanations of how the claims process works and suggestions for dealing with that process. There are also descriptions of the ordeals that claimants endure when "bad faith" practices of insurance companies force legitimate claims into litigation.

Before reading this book, I was under the silly impression that the British legal system, from which ours evolved, was closer to us than it evidently is. It is a reminder that we've come a long way in the development of jurisprudence since Declaring our Independence.

McLibel is a true tale of once upon a time, not so very long ago (1990 - 1997) when the Davids took on a Goliath (Ronald McDonald and his Big Bad Corporation) in not-so-Merry-Old England. Two unemployed activists had distributed leaflets, (which they neither wrote nor produced,) that had the audacity to criticize the corporate giant. The two, who were unable to afford attorneys, were put to a Kafka-esque Kangaroo (with apologies to residents of Australia) Court trial, the likes of which, were it to appear on Saturday Night Live, would be condemned as Theatre of the Absurd.

The author describes the protracted trial: "Like the interminable case of _Jarndyce v. Jarndyce_ in Charles Dickens' *Bleak House,* _McDonald's Corporation and McDonald's Restaurants Ltd. vs. Helen Marie Steel and David Morris_ (popularly known as the McLibel case) drone(d) on in claustrophobic isolation."

One of the most striking things about McLibel, to the American sensibility, is the arcane, archaic, bizarre, Byzantine Quagmire of British libel law. The book is sometimes difficult to digest. There are no footnotes, endnotes, annotations, or other direct attribution of sources. I was disappointed that the Writ and other pleadings (actual legal papers which are the foundation of a lawsuit,) were not included in the Appendix. A reproduction of the offending leaflet would also have been helpful. The author, British "Environmental Journalist" John Vidal (Hey! Is he related to Gore Vidal?) frequently plagues the reader with his own protracted political polemics. But it is, nonetheless, enriched food for thought.

Do you want fries with that? Here's an interesting bit of trivia included in the book: Ray Kroc, founding force behind McDonald's as we know it, was in the same World War I ambulance driving company as Walt Disney.

The Mcdonalds Corporation has used the threat of litigation to protect both its logos and also its reputation. This is an example in which the threat of legal action came unstuck. Two British enviromentalists had handed out material which it was later found out defamed the McDonalds corporation. Defamation action was threatened unless the enviromentalists recanted. This they refused to do and McDonalds issued a writ suggesting that they had been libeled.

It was at this point that McDonalds made a serious legal error in making some allegations against the enviromentalists. This led to a counter suite for defamation which was run at the same time. The problem for McDonalds was that they had to lead evidence to prove their case. Normally in a defamation case it would be up to the defendant to do so. As the two enviromentalists were both broke they would not have been able to do so. However McDonalds by their tactical mistake forced themselves to provide evidence to back up their claims. The two enviromentalists were able to cross examine the various McDonalds witnesses to provide evidence for their claims.

As a result the case went on for so long that it became Britain's longest ever case. The two enviromentalists had a year to learn how to cross examine and were able to elicit some evidence that was unflattering McDonalds.

In these sorts of cases costs of litigation are nominally recoverable from the losing side. However as the two enviromentalists had no money any cost order against them was without value. This led to a incredibly long and expensive case which ended up bleeding McDonalds with the unfortunate side effect that the two enviromentalists were able to milk it for all it was worth to attack the reputation of McDonalds. From the point of view of the firm a total disaster... The decision to litigate had been a disaster.

The book is okay but leaden at times, the film that was released of the event is probably a bit more interesing.

McLibel is an account of the longest trial in British legal history - McDonald's Restaurants v Morris & Steel. The story is in every way a David and Goliath story - two penniless lay people are pitted against the Dean of British libel lawyers backed by the limitless coffers of a major international company. Despite the overwhelming odds against them, both in terms of legal talent and legal obstacles, the defendants do a creditable job of holding their own.

This book offers an interesting British counterpoint to Harr's A Civil Action. Both books describe major legal struggles between the Haves and the Have-nots and in both cases the outcome represents less than a clear victory for either side. McLibel also offers an interesting critique of British libel law, the limitations on free speech in Britain, "ownership" of the law, manipulation of the legal system by the powerful, and the role of the judge.

It also offers Big Business a salutary lesson - not every apprent pushover is going to play dead the moment litigation is threatened. When it comes to counting the most costly legal mistakes ever, this case must rank somewhere near the top of the list. The case turned into a legal quagmire that McDonalds found it impossible to extricate itself from. Whatever consolation the company may have found in the verdict, this was a pyrrhic victory and an undoubted public relations disaster.

Personally,this book may be on the extreme side. Some of these suggestions might be nice, but many of them are unpractical. The media gives people what they want essentially, in order to make a change in it, it does not need to become an issue in political debate. It needs to become an issue in the hearts of people. People need to be educated enough to find for themselves what is the truth. If the people seek the truth, the media that provides it will be the most successful. Its a simple business, supply and demand.

I have just finished this book for an Electronics Media class I am taking at USF.

Although I agree with most of the complaints that the authors expound about the problems with global corporations and the current state of the media today, I do not see their Socialist fixes as any kind of real solution. In fact, in many instances, they are just power grabs by the Left to get you to pay for their programs (ie National Public Radio and Public Television, which are dominated by the Left).

I agree with the concept of microradio stations to help spread media access around, but not their demand for government subsidies to help the "less fortunate" pay for their stations. They are not that expensive to buy and maintain.

I believe a more Libertarian approach to open media access would be more productive than the authors brand of Socialist "fixes"... which in the end would probably just lead to abuses by the Left.

But it is a good read from the point-of-view of defining all that is wrong with the current state of the media today and why it is out of control.

This indepth analysis should put an end to the myth of liberal bias in the media. As the Left has been saying for years, the media is only as liberal as the conservative corporations that own them. We seem to be tumbling towards a world in which everything is owned by a relatively few number of conjoined companies whose activities are reported on by a handful of aqenda-driven media giants all bent on diseminating a particular view of predigested news aimed at the lowest common denominator. There has to be another way although, like a previous reviewer, I'm not sure all the solutions in this book will work. I would also like to point out that 90% of National Public Radio's funding comes from donations made by listeners and from corporate underwriting. Only 10% of the NPR budget comes from the federal and state governments and all of that is in the form of grants used for specific programs (science, history, music, literature, etc).

This 1965 book made the author famous nationwide. It claimed that the Chevrolet Corvair, an air-cooled rear-engine rear wheel drive car, was totally unsafe, even while parked! This is either an exaggeration, or a lie. Like the VW Beetle, the links on the rear wheels would not prevent a rear wheel from folding inward under extreme conditions. The publicity later caused GM to correct this problem.

The Corvair was the most successful GM compact car of the time, and the most fuel-efficient. Could this attack have resulted from the machinations of Big Oil? After this, cars got longer, wider, and heavier with decreasing fuel economy until after the 1973 oil shortage; but it took an Act of Congress to do this (companies are prevented from collusion).

Nader later formed a group to support his activities; this required donations from various groups, some of whom may have benefitted from his work. I think some of his proposals would benefit the special interests of patent holders or manufacturers; such as "childproof" bottle caps.

An old saying is "the perfect is the enemy of the good". I wonder if the proposals of Nader's group ever benefitted some special interests at expense of the common people?

Could Ralph Nader still be acting for special interests today? Read the newspapers and decide for yourself.

As a Traffic Safety Specialist, this book is a MUST, this old book needs to be mandatory reading for any person interested in Road Safety, Ralph documented the resistance of car companies to the introduction of safety features, like safety belts, that looks timely today, for example with the lobby that produce a delay in the mandatory fitting of air bags. Also you will learn how the primitive road safety components, still used in USA, called the three E's (Engineering, Enforcement, Education ) was born as a device to direct the efforts to the community away from the real problems of safety of the vehicles, some of the that was sell with tires that don't resist the weight of the fully loaded vehicle !.

Finally you can understand the lacking level of road safety in US versus European countries that have in service safety policies that will reduce the absolute number of killed by 30% over 5 years.

This book is the necessary building stone to the effort to make car manufacturers accountable for the safety level of his products.

The Corvair was the Pinto of the '60s. Ralph Nadir was the first to say, "Enough is enough!" and took the Big Three to the mat, in this case just Chevrolet. If you liked Roger and Me you must have to read this book--it will change the way you look at modern day power structure. To think one man who came to define "consumer advocate" could topple a mighty giant of American Indusrty! This car was dangerous because the company tried to cut costs on the rear suspension, but all they saved was $4 per car!!! Incredable to believe human life could mean so little to some, but that is why you must to read this book.

"The startling truth about G.M.'s secret probe into the public and private life of Ralph Nader." Following publication of Nader's book on the Chevrolet Corvair, "Unsafe At Any Speed", Nader first suspected he was under surveillance. This is the "scandal sheet" of that surveillance.

The book details the conflict of General Motors and the City of Detroit vs. the residents in a Detroit area nicknamed Poletown in the early 80's. Once you wade through the first several chapters of dry facts you get to get a feel for a drama shaping up, which indeed unfolds and fills the remaining chapters. The book goes into great detail to show how a public institution such as the City of Detroit can take land owned and paid for by private citizens and give it to a corportation to build a factory all in the name of the public good. It details the small group's failed struggle against Detroit, GM and the media to preserve their community, both in factual evidence and emotional accounts. --But be warned, this is most definitly a one-sided account.

Regulation proponent Ralph Nader directed his group in an effort to study monopolies and how government supports them. A pointed and accusatory read, big business is described as an irredeamable taskmaster who seeks to influence or control employees, competitors and consumers alike.Most of the facts and quotes that are used to support these broad wandering accusations and goals are obviously too twisted and disjointed for any real analysis. Quite clearly, they often mix opposing or incompatable findings. Sometimes the read is entertaining but more often it is like the ravings of the confused. Written in 71, printed in 73, this book is only good for historical research of Nader's writings or socialist based theories.