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.

Of course mothers can get warm fuzzies when formula feeding - would never imply anything else. It is nurturing a baby, after all Just as breastfeeding can bring you the opposite of warm fuzzies ('cold spikies'???) from time to time.

The point I was making is that if you can't push a product on the contents, then you look at making a relationship with your consumers based on feelings/impressions/emotions.

One of the reasons why mothers who enjoy breastfeeding say they enjoy it is the feeling it gives them (I don't often hear mothers say they are enjoying breastfeeding because of the antibodies) and the experience of closeness to their babies. This is not to say women who bottle feed don't get this, but when it comes to feelings/impressions/emotions, this is what is associated with breastfeeding (it's also what women miss when they stop bf).

So what greater coup than to harness all that for formula feeding in order to shift more product?

I think it probably did cost a bomb - could easily be a million, if not millions plural: the focus groups, the research, the change of machinery and so on. Changing a logo and a slogan in corporate life is not a cheap date. I have some inside knowledge of this ;)

now my attention is brought to this topic I'm surprised that packaging for formula isn't more interesting and less uniform and medical looking

Doh - when I said "and do something else that hijacks the 'feelings' people have about breastfeeding, and link them with breastmilk and breastfeeding, without making any claims or even saying anything about the product at all... "

I meant to say they link these feelings with formula and formula feeding, without actually saying anything about formula.

Twinkle, I don't really have an opinion on what the 'image' of formula feeding should be on a packet, sorry.

I think all packaging and marketing should follow the WHO code, which would mean no pics of mothers and /or babies.

The name of the brand and a list of ingredients, instructions for use, that sort of thing, is all that is needed.

I don't think women are 'daft' to believe claims. Why wouldn't they believe them? They know we live in a country where false advertising and false trades descriptions are against the law. I have seen many times on mumsnet posts which say 'if formula was harmful to health, it wouldn't be allowed to be sold'. It's understandable that people are misled

I've not read all the stuff after the OP but don't you hold a baby to bottle feed in a similar way to breastfeed?? The logo doesn't imply bf-ing to me at all.

But the shape of the baby's head looks to me as though it is turned towards the mothers chest, which you wouldn't have with bottlefeeding, it would be more of a side-on image rather than the back of the baby's head.

Another excuse to thrash this out when I think we are all agreed breast is best for babies but not everyone is able to or wants to.The ad looks like a load of squiggles to me and doesn't automatically look like breast feeding at all

Companies the size of SMA don't alter their logos without considerable market research. They will have been doing what Tiktok says - building the brand, creating the warm fuzzies - if people "love the milk they give" they've achieved their goal. The logo is clearly a powerful part of that subliminal message.

To say that SMA haven't made any comparison with breastfeeding with their logo is naive, IMO.

Defo looks like breastfeeding - that is the point of it. Subliminal advertising at it's best.

dunt look like breast feeding to me

the by-line is pushing things imo

Why have they changed their logo then?

But is that not exactly the way you'd hold a baby to bottle feed it??

Where's the bottle then, SD?

It's very similar to logos used to indicate that 'breastfeeding here is welcome'

just looks like the way a parent would hold their baby.

SD and Custy, you honestly really believe that SAM have changed their logo to look like "a cuddle"? With no breastfeeding subliminal message at all? It didn't even occur to them to make it look even slightly like breastfeeding?

this is what inspired it i think

It's meant to be ambiguous - it could be someone cuddling the baby, it could also be someone (breast)feeding their baby. It could not be someone bottle feeding the baby, 'cos where is the bottle??

The M bit of the logo (yes, zippi, a bit like those golden arches, too ) is like a heart, as well as round and curvy and soft like breasts (though upside down).

The shading of the 'mother's head' is such that it is looking down at the baby's head, whose shading is such that it is looking up at mum with head turned in, in the way it would be if breastfeeding.

None of this is accidental - it's a highjack of breastfeeding imagery. Remember, too, that the most desirable customers for formula manufactuers are women who want or wanted to breastfeed. If you can get them to switch, maybe partially at first, then you have them long-term, as would-be bf mothers keep their babies on formula for longer than mothers who start off as happy formula feeders (ie they are slower to give ordinary cows milk).

It would make sense for the logo to appeal primarily to breastfeeding mothers, and for them to feel good about switching a) to formula b) to SMA.

This is not remotely controversial.

It's what commercial companies do - they try to maximise sales. Why would infant health or accurate information be a part of this? What information does 'love the milk you give' to someone wanting to choose between formulas?

Where they less restricted by regulations about promotion (eg in the USA), they make the most of this 'freedom' with free samples, TV advertising of first milk, idealised packaging, and the rest of it.

Am totally with you on this one Hunker (including the "c*nts" bit )

noddy, you say this is 'another excuse' to thrash this out - you mean the 'breast versus bottle' thing?

We are talking marketing here, and women's rights to have their choice to use formula, or not, and which brand, if any, to be guided by information, not commercial interests.

Why would you not think this is worthy of debate?

It has nothing to do with the relative merits of breast or formula (as you say, most people agree on that) or which women have to use formula.

it seems that noddy would have it that we can't discuss weaning either, tbh, tiktok. noddysnet.com would be a less contentious and also more boring place, would it not?
honestly, i think you've just got to accept, noddy, that this is a place for mothers to discuss whatever the hell they fancy (with one bizarro exception, of course). with the absolute best will in the world, if you don't like the threads, don't read them.

f off

Noddy, what is your problem?

? hunker

???