Oh, she made it clear that you were not associated with Mumsnet, or paid by them, and that you were "simply" a passionate volunteer. It was very nicely put with complete clarity.
"Mumsnet is actually very good (I think) on bf and bf support, and refuse to take any formula ads, so I hope she mentioned this. But the response 'it's expressed milk in the bottle' is so not the point, and that audience will have thought it was a naive answer"
Yes, she did say that they didn't take formula ads, and discussed the history of this including where they DID take an ad in the early days but haven't done since. I think the problem was her claim to therefore be WHO compliant backfired with the logo query. Naive? That's putting it mildly TBH. People were CROSS.
"'how women seek help with early parenting in an internet age" yeah - well - actually I'd expected it to be this, and talking to people afterwards I was urging them to come on here and take a look around. I think it could be really valuable to them to understand better what's going on.
"She could have said (maybe she did?) that women are using their iPhones and their lap tops hours after giving birth, in maternity wards staffed by midwives, saying 'please help me breastfeed'. She could have explained how quickly women do get help from an internet forum, at all times of the day and night; how women support each other; how the emotions embedded into infant feeding spill out into mumsnet bun fights...and so on."
No, not at all, which is what I think would have really been better.
But "what women are saying", by picking some of the really common themes on here, could have clearly shown that EVERY DAY women are being let down in the same ways, all the time. This information would surely have been really useful to take back as evidence to commissioners.