After hearing about Emma Kwasnica's decision to pull out of the Babble.com "100 Moms Who Are Changing YOUR World" promotion over her concerns that Babble.com carries infant formula advertising, Jamie Parker decided to find out for herself what the fuss was about. She called the folks operating the Similac hotline and asked for help. She contacted Emma this morning with this report:
"So, just now out of curiosity, I looked up the "Similac Feeding Hotline" number, and gave them a faux compliant. I said my 8 month old (true) isn't seeming satisfied after nursing (false). Their immediate solution? "Why don't I take your address and we can overnight you some samples, and then we can put in an order to ship direct to you? Then its just as convenient, you won't even need to leave the house!" When I said that I wanted to continue breastfeeding, they said (direct quote here): "Your baby has all the benefits breastfeeding offers. After 6 months, breastfeeding and feeding quality formula are exactly the same."
So the rationalizing messaging from Babble owner Rufus Griscom about how Similac really is helping women to breastfeed and that it is a wise marketing tactic because those moms who choose formula later on will turn to the brand that made them feel good? It's just a smokescreen. First, let's take a look at what Rufus said in response to PhDinParenting's blog post on this last year:
I would like to take a moment to address a larger difference in perspective that we have. I think you, and some of the commenters here, believe that it’s impossible for a formula company to offer genuine advice on their website and elsewhere (not on Babble, our content is independent) that is genuinely seeking to help moms breastfeed more effectively. I disagree. I think it’s possible, however ironic that it may seem, that the formula company that is most genuine in it’s endorsement of breastfeeding will be the most successful. I am not a Similac spokesperson, but I don’t think you give them enough credit. I would be interested to know what you think of the breastfeeding page on their site (http://bit.ly/9UceeP), which does not once mention formula, and links to the WHO and the AAP for more information. Companies do make good decisions — Google pulled out of China which was not good for business but was the right thing to do. In the long run, ethical behavior is good business, and I believe that view is ascendant in the business community more broadly. You may consider this naïve; in my view, on the other hand, there is a guilty-until-proven-innocent assumption in this forum which is not necessarily right.One other place we disagree is in the ability of women to make good decisions based on clearly demarcated advice from different sources. If the Similac help line were not clearly identified as such, I would consider that to be an ethical violation. It is clearly demarcated, however, and I think moms are smart enough to make their own assessments of what they read and hear with all the facts at hand.
Moms sure are going to get warm fuzzies here - finally *someone* is saying it's ok to feed formula instead of breastfeed, and look, these nice people are going to send some free to the doorstep!
The Similac "help" line is there for one reason: to identify a mother who may be having problems breastfeeding and to get her to switch to formula. It's a great tactic because they've got the actual potential buyer right on the line - they can get a name and an address for that all important first shipment "right to your home!" all the while planting further seeds of doubt about the value of continued breastfeeding.
If you believe strongly about this issue, post about it in the comments below. Tell Rufus Griscom you want him to stop targeting breastfeeding and new mothers with formula company ads. If you have a Twitter account, you can tweet a petition to the whole Twitterverse.
If you want to read more about this issue, here is a list of blog posts, more in less in the order they were published (edited to add new items as I find out about them):
Why do 'lactivists' want to ban baby formula advertising? - The Globe and Mail
Informed Parenting: More Babbling about the Babble Debacle
Informed Parenting: Breasts, Babble, Boycotts and Bashing. Baffled?
The International Breastfeeding Symbol » Blog Archive » No one said it was easy to walk the walk…
This is so NOT about your boobs!! | Natural Urban Mamas
Jodine's World: Shame is the new guilt
Breastfeeding Advocate Asks Babble to Remove Her “Momination” — PhD in Parenting
Jodine's World: Babbling about breasts, again.
And here's is Babble.com's response to the issue from Her Bad Mother blogger and owner of The Bad Moms Club Catherine Connors, who has recently been hired by Babble.com to fire up their new Babble Voices collection of bloggers. She's got another smokescreen up - she might make you feel ashamed for raising your voice - because your voice could hurt - shame, even - mothers who have already been duped. You might want to tell Catherine what you think, too.
Great article, thank you Jodine for writing this up. Hopefully, we can bring attention to this issue of false advisement and have it stopped! I will be sharing this link on my FB page in hopes others may learn the truth.
ReplyDeleteVery informative and I am glad someone wrote about this. I shared it on my FB page with this comment: "Formula marketing to parents, expectant mothers and health care providers is insidious, unethical, and downright discouraging of breastfeeding in so many ways, some subtle, some not so subtle, as in this case." Well, it's not really unethical for health care workers to receive marketing messages, but I recently attended a workshop (at my own cost) which was cleverly disguised as an educational session on newborn drops and falls and "nutrition." The majority of the session was on how the company's products were the greatest and best. More than half of the participants left after the 30+ minute marketing spiel, not sticking around to hear a taped webcast, which frankly was not very informative and offered no opportunity to ask questions or make comments. Still waiting to get the "research" to back up their marketing claims.
ReplyDeleteI'm shocked! (Not)
ReplyDeleteGREAT post Jodine -- I love how you've referenced the whole backstory, so that readers can get the whole picture. Certain other bloggers don't... hmmmm, gee, I wonder why?
ReplyDelete"Moms sure are going to get warm fuzzies here - finally *someone* is saying it's ok to feed formula instead of breastfeed, and look, these nice people are going to send some free to the doorstep! "...... buhahahahahahhah!! awesome!
ReplyDeleteYip. I agree with the idea that companies can make ethical decisions. But breastfeeding mums are the enemy of formula companies. Formula companies collectively have quite disgusting track records around marketing their products. The most common marketing gimmicks are providing 'information' to consumers and health professionals. Trust me, If I need help breastfeeding, I'm not going to want to hear what the formula companies want to say about it. When I have trouble breastfeeding, I find it incredibly motivating that there are shareholders in formula companies who want me to fail and buy their products. Sucks to be you, formula companies, 13 months breastfeeding and counting.
ReplyDeleteI know this is an old post, but I got here through a facebook link to another blog. Let's make one thing clear: formula companies have NO INTEREST in anyone continuing breastfeeding. They are FOR PROFIT busineses. They make no money if a mom continues to breastfeed. Their helpline is not staffed by volunteers, it is staffed by paid employees that want to keep their jobs and paycheck. To do that, they need paying customers. Their tactics are no better than a common drug pusher. Give them the first hit free and they'll keep coming back.
ReplyDeleteAlso, to give my opinion to what Rufus Griscom posited: " I would be interested to know what you think of the breastfeeding page on their site (http://bit.ly/9UceeP)". What I think is that the picture is replete with subliminal messaging. The picture of the mom nursing her baby is blurry with the focus being on the baby's feet. The message they are sending with this is that breastfeeding is shameful, must look away. Alternatively, the blurry picture says they are trying to take the focus off of breastfeeding. If anyone thinks the pictures advertisers use are anything but deliberate, well, you are a victim of advertising. The same thing with the ad for the helpline. Dark pictures, the two most "new mother" type questions assigning the infant a female gender (weaker in the eyes of advertisers) create a sense of insecurity and vulnerability. They are hear to help you out of the darkness of breastfeeding. Let's help you out. Let's make you a PAYING customer! Their whole campaign is an insult to my intelligence.
My breastfeeding days are over, but I nursed both my boys past 2 years old because nursing into the toddler years IS beneficial and the fact that their reps say otherwise say they have been trained to deliberately misinform the public. Formula feeding is NEVER the same as breastfeeding. Formula doesn't change from feeding to feeding giving its consumer protection from illnesses they were just exposed to. Its fat content doesn't change to accomodate the needs of the nursing baby/toddler or the 1000's of other things LIVING breast milk does. It is a factory made formulation with a host of known/unknown ingredients and in some cases contamination.
Whew! Sorry.. Got off on a rant there. Thank you for providing this article and forum.