not looking for a row, but has anyone seen the new SMA logo? the one that looks like the mum is bf?

[harpsichordcarrier]

here's the logo

you tube clip here

sma site

way to get round the new advertising rules, which forbid them from saying "close to breastmilk" &c
anyone like to complain? I would like them, very much, to have to change their logo and slogan again. especially as they have clearly spent quite a bit of wonga on it.

that would have been great but instead i was treated like a second class citizan by my mw for being unable to bf (lots of "shes at least trying" "dont you want your child to have the best start" "come on, its perfectly natural" and finally, "well, if you want to give up so soon") and because the laws are so strict on advertising fm (which im not criticising btw) i had to make a decision based on hearsay.

i dont understand whats so wrong with fm companies being allowed to advertise, they are selling an alternative to bm. they dont claim that they are better than bm, just an alternative. they dont sell hard drugs, alcohol, cigarettes etc. to read some of these posts youd be forgiven for thinking that we are discussing a tobacco companies advertising technique, and not the ONLY available alternative to bf!

Nobody's saying formula shouldn't exist! Just that the adverts never have any useful information in them, so they serve to only a) try to convince women not to breastfeed and b) make formula more expensive.

Does anyone actually think that someone will choose SMA purely because of their logo?

but they dont convince women not to bf! anyone with half a brain cell knows that bm is the best thing for all. but fm IS an alternative and why shouldnt it promote itself as such?

have just started a poll, i may be wrong, in which case i apologise.

I kind of agree with you Lissie.
Whats stopping the goverment set up a big ad campaign and have pictures of women BF on billboards and in magazines?

Nothing.
But yet it isnt done.

someone made a great point a while ago about soaps showing women bf, it isnt done, why not? choice of bf/ff doesnt come down to ad campaigns, its down to a single person making a decision based on their circumstances

heres the thread

Of course no-one chooses to ff because they like the logo, but it's all part of the "brand" - how people feel about a product, what it means to other people, it's profile etc. People tend to choose products known to them, as they feel they can trust something that lots of other people are using. Having a logo is all part of that. It shoudn't matter, but it does.

I work for a charity. We have better things to do with our money than worry about our logo but it is something we need to consider. The RNIB for example, a v long established and v well known charity is about to change its logo (again). Shouldn't they be spending their money on supporting blind and partially sighted people? Of course they should but this stuff does matter (unfortunately). If it didn't, organisations wouldn't spend their money on it.

i accept that to a point, but i dont understand why posts on here are saying that fm companies shouldnt be allowed to advertise and fm should only be available on presciption. after all ad campaigns are only a part of the story, women go for trusted brands, mainly coz of recommendations. if you choose not to/cant bf how else are you supposed to decide which fm to use?

and hi beansprout

No-one consciously choses a brand of formula based on the packaging. Nevertheless, packaging is carefully designed to appeal to a certain sort of person (the target market) at a subliminal level. Lance Packard wrote an interesting book about this sort of thing - "The Hidden Persuaders". He was talking about how cigarette manufacturers (among others) differentiate their products (which are all very similar) by the creation of a brand image designed to appeal on a subconscious level.

That Aptamil is so frequently recommended by health professionals (see other thread) is a reflection of the way it is heavily marketed to them in trade journals etc.

Lissielou you said somewhere that every one knows bm is best for all. Why then are you criticising your mw for encouraging you to continue? When ff babies are more likely to end up in hospital than bf babies, isn't it her job to try to get mothers to persevere, esp when there are so many commercial pressures to ff, as we are discussing?

I've heard plenty of stories of mws in hospitals, who on hearing the first difficulty in feeding from a new mum, instantly hand her a bottle.

I am not criticising you for ff, Lissie; I'm sure you had your reasons in which case you will have been able to articulate them to your mw. It is her job to make you think about why you make the decisions that you do. We live in a free society and you are able to make that decision without any one being able to take action against you other than give their opinion, or point out facts which you can answer or ignore.

lissie, what makes you think that advertising helps you make an informed choice between formula brands?

I am genuinely mystified at this - you complain (rightly) that you had to make a decision on hearsay, and yet proclaim the right of formula manufacturers to advertise in order to fill the information gap (as if advertising is a form of information sharing....ha!), and then go on to say no one makes a decision based on advertising. You are a bit confused, doncha think?

People's decisions a) to use formula b) to use a particular brand of formula are not based on any one single thing.

But marketing has a powerful role to play. It helps with brand recognition; it creates a feeling, often unconscious; it legitimises a choice that someone might otherwise feel reluctant to make. You can see these strategies used with other products, when it's appropriate - in the case of legitimising a choice, you see it in brands like 'Good for You' foods which proclaim the low-fat status of ready-meals some people might otherwise avoid.

My ideal of unbranded, unmarketed formula that is cheaply and freely available to all who want to use it would avoid all this shenannigans. I would want healthcare professionals trained in helping mothers decide if they wanted to use formula with good information about each brand and type, as well as trained in helping with breastfeeding for those mothers who wanted to continue with full bf.

I agree tiktok I think that is exactly what is needed.

Actually Lisselou I know mothers who think formula is better than breast, because

"it's made by experts so they know what to put in it, it must be better"

WB, that is my mil and dm's view too . Also extends to home cooking as well MIL said that ds was missing out on vital nutrients because I didn't feed him enough jars.

I have come across many people who believe formula is better for their babies than breast. If you read the literature on why people choose to use formula and not breastfeed, reasons come up such as 'you can see how much they are getting with a bottle' and 'it's not very hygienic to breastfeed' .

People who think like this deserve more than a dismissal for having 'half a brain cell' or for being 'daft'.

In the information vacuum of infant feeding, of course people have misconceptions - and even people who half half a brain cell deserve good information!

I'm not calling them thick, just uneducated and ill advised.

Boris, sorry, I know you were not calling them anything! But lissie downthread did!

Ah!!

Am only skim reading TBH, as am chasing DD around the room with a potty at the same time.

have been following this thread with interest, but not posted.

i did however attempt to post on the Cow & Gate forum on the "I've given my baby a rusk at 7 weeks because i'm really stupid" thread.

they've not put it up.

i think someone was querying why the only responses on there were positive ones? there's your answer.

it's a moderated website. anything that doesn't agree with their philosophy isn't posted.

neither have i fio

and i treat all these surveys with suspicion

they are just inaccurate

exit poll anyone?

Fio - i met plenty of people who thought FM was just as good (if not better) than BM. in my antenatal class my MW (militant bf-er) pointed out all the benefits of bf-ing over ff-ing. most of the people there seemed very surprised.