To think change4life shouldn't partner up with a baby killing machine?

[LambinsideaDuckinsideaTrout]

Nestle? Really?

www.nhs.uk/change4life/Pages/national-partners-nestle.aspx

Excuse the language but, what the fucking fuck?

Ahem!

Thank you to those who have been in touch about this thread. We've been through it to remove the posts which break our talk guidelines and we think it's best to lock this thread for a little while in order so people can cool off!

MNHQ

Morning everyone,

We've taken another look at this thread and deleted posts which we feel break out talk guidelines. Mumsnet supports the Nestle boycott - you can see our position here. As ever, we don't expect every MNer to agree with us, but we do feel that folks should stick within the talk guidelines when posting, regardless of where they fall within the argument.

This thread poses an interesting question, and we'd like it to stay for this reason, but obviously if it descends into a bunfight, we may have to reconsider - which would be a shame. If there is anything you'd like us to look at, please do report it to us

scottishmummy. But it isnt their reputation that is the problem is it? It is their substance.
Hence why I dont like PR machines.

Exactly, doing these things to make themselves 'look good' is just a diversion.

Every business maintains it's brand image,and presence.no reason nestle shouldn't either
Of course corporations want to present themselves as partner of choice
And naturally nestle will want to be associated with health campaign

Ok then, enjoy op. What silly immature twaddle.

It is wrong that they should be able to associate with the health campaign because of who they are, what they do, and what they sell. Not to mention the illegal practices they use.

What nearly killed my nephew was my m, while he was 12 hours old and my sister was in a coma being forced off the hospital premises to feed him with formula and was advised to take h to the smoking shelter to feed him. This nonsense has gone on far too long. We're they really proposing to express from her drug filled comatose body?

I know that they want to sm. But to me it does not in the slightest rub out what they have done and are doing.
Same with other companies.

Theodorous? Sorry, I don't understand your post in relation to this thread.

Nestle will provoke range reaction as this threads attests.and one. An respond in range ways

If they wanted to improve this aspect of their reputation there are many MANY other ways they could and SHOULD go about it. There would be no profit in it for them however. The fact that they are responsible for infant deaths has no effect on them. Only profit.

I had a lecturer at uni who had set a previous cohort the task of researching nestle in regards to the baby milk controversy.

A week after it was set nestles legal team had contacted the university to threaten them with legal action unless the project was stopped. This was just in a non famous, average university that most have not heard of.

Bloody scary.

That is unsurprisingly not in the least bit shocking to me. I wouldn't expect anything less.

most businesses will act to protect their brand reputation.legally if reqd
I can assure you most companies would initiate legal action if they felt threatened
Legal action That's not a nestle thang, that's the litigious culture we live in

Yes, most businesses would, especially when they've broken the law and knowingly been the direct cause of the death of thousands of babies, and carried on regardless of the blood on their hands.

Gina ford threatened to get legal with mn over comments she found objectionable
Threat of Legal proceedings are common response these days
Gf didn't just think mn was just a chat forum,nor are nestle likely to think just a wee uni

You're fond of the hyperbole aren't you.any business will react to perceived attack
I suppose it's case of let's see how well the work in de,ivering this health programme

Gina Ford is an idiot. IMO.

I am not exaggerating what Nestle are responsible for doing. So hyperbole is incorrect.

As I saying people are now v conscious of individual and corporate image,
and will get legal if they feel it is compromised its phenomenon on the rise
It extends to twitter, Sally bercow tweeted wrongly inferring lord mcalpine up to no good
She was fined

fond of embellishment for effect,as you said said baby killing machine was to get thread hits
Anyway nestle have this secured partnership,they sponsored london marathon
lets see their ability to work in health with is outcome and delivery focused

I know what hyperbole means. I have not exaggerated nor embellished. These are facts. It is the truth. Yes I used the term I did to get attention to the thread. Facts are facts though. So hyperbole (by it's definition) is incorrect.

Well,it is incorrect to state nestle are baby killing machine. Key bit being machine
you know that's not true,but you like the ohhh err,so you used it
I'm interested to see how the perform and if they secure more contracts

They are the direct cause of death for thousands of babies. Literally. No exaggeration.