Active discussions

Meet the Other Phone. A phone that grows with your child.

Meet the Other Phone.
A phone that grows with your child.

Buy now

Please or to access all these features

Talk
Infant feeding

Get advice and support with infant feeding from other users here.

Original poster

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

673 replies

harpsichordcarrier · 14/04/2007 21:39

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.

OP posts:
AitchTwoOh · 15/04/2007 16:59

am i to f off (how coy, btw) or tiktok? if me, why? i was nice... there were smileys...

AitchTwoOh · 15/04/2007 17:02

'course, so was tiktok.

Greenleeves · 15/04/2007 17:33

ROFL at zippitippitoes, I hadn't noticed that but it's bloody funny

tiktok · 15/04/2007 18:24

I'm not sure if I am supposed to 'f off' or if it is only Aitch, or maybe the two of us....mystery, innit?

In order to be concerned about the way formula is marketed, you have to see an issue in infant feeding, you have to think it matters how babies are fed, and that it matters if women are not supported to breastfeed and that it matters that women who formula feed are given honest and thorough information about the different types, how to prepare it and to give it, and that this info should not be primarily designed to get you to buy the stuff, but to inform you.

If you are not concerned with anything like that, and you think infant nutrition and parent information is somehow well-served by permitting icky, fluffy slogans and chocolate-box logos....then I suppose you might tell other people who think differently to 'f off'.

If you were rude, of course.

SoupDragon · 15/04/2007 18:32

"Where's the bottle then, SD?"

Well, where's the baby's body? The mother's eyes? Hands? Breasts? Yes, it's meant to be ambiguous of course it is but it is not obviously or solely a mother breastfeeding.

SoupDragon · 15/04/2007 18:33

"It could not be someone bottle feeding the baby, 'cos where is the bottle??" Where are the breasts then? There's no hint of a breast at all so by your own definition it can't be someone breastfeeding.

noddyholder · 15/04/2007 18:35

Well it was for aitch but you are more than welcome after that post.How the hell do I not care about infant nutrition?And how would you know?

zippitippitoes · 15/04/2007 18:37

if formula milks are not fundamentally different from each othr then it is only marketing which separates them...is that important if some gain a greater market share than others?

imnotinterstedinyourkids · 15/04/2007 18:38

well all thsi has done ahs made me look at sma more

SoupDragon · 15/04/2007 18:38

Sorry Tiktok but I think the shading on the baby's head is such that it is looking directly up at the mother, not turned in as if breastfeeding at all.

zippitippitoes · 15/04/2007 18:41

I do think making a fuss about this logo is petty

it is what gives lobbying groups a bad name once they go off at tangents

tiktok · 15/04/2007 18:41

noddy, I am happy to accept your assurance you do care, after all. But your original objection was to the debate, which you described as an 'excuse' to 'thrash this out', which I took to mean you thought it was tedious to discuss the marketing issue.

noddyholder · 15/04/2007 18:47

We live in a world where everything is for sale and this logo is just another example of a large co rebranding and people will see different things in what is essentially an image which you can interpret how you like.I think that the same numbers of people will choose to breast/bottle feed regardless of this logo and if someone who has to bottle feed gets some comfort from the fact that they think it is as good as breast milk then whats the big deal.The large proportion of society know it isn't

tiktok · 15/04/2007 18:48

Soup, you may be right.....I think the ambiguity is two way (could be a cuddle, could be breast) but you may be right it also includes the possibility of bottle feeding. I don't think 2-way or 3-way is crucial. It's the deliberate ambiguity that makes the logo very effective.

Zippi - the way formula milk is marketed (and the logo is a part of that) is very important. It's not a 'tangent' at all! Read my post below to see why I think that.

As for getting a bigger market share - I couldn't care less if Cow&Gate sold more than Milupa or SMA or whatever. I am pretty sure they are fundamentally the same, and if one is truly a lot better than the other, then I want all formula fed babies to have it, and for ff mothers to know this from an independent source.

But the 'market' in which these manufacturers are carving out a share also includes the 450,000 mothers who start off breastfeeding every year, and an unknown number of the 150,000 mothers who begin ff because they think it doesn't matter if they ff or bf....and that's why ethical, honest marketing is important.

Or do you think it doesn't matter that people choose their child's sole source of nutrition on whether they like the logo, the slogan or the pack? Because there is bugger all else to go on....

tiktok · 15/04/2007 18:49

noddy - you are so wrong. The survey last year of new mothers (MORI poll) showed 36 per cent of new mums thought formula was as good as or nearly as good as breastmilk. And I want mothers to have comfort, but not at the expense of other people's information. Keeping people ignorant is infantilising.

noddyholder · 15/04/2007 18:53

This logo will not change that For people who formula feed/fed and have happy healthy children it is as good

FioFio · 15/04/2007 18:53

This reply has been deleted

Message withdrawn

zippitippitoes · 15/04/2007 18:58

if you've got as far as comparing the logos on tins of formula then the chance is you are going to buy some

if people shouldn't be using it then make it more unappealing and issue government leaflets saying it is bad and have health warnings on it

hunkermunker · 15/04/2007 18:59

SD, as I said, it could be a cuddle, it could be a breastfeed - what it very definitely isn't is a formula feed.

Fio, as I said, you really think SMA have gone to the trouble of redesigning the logo without thinking "let's make this look like breastfeeding"?

LadyOfTheFlowers · 15/04/2007 19:02

i have just googled and to me it just looks like the only way they could incorporate a mother and baby into one of the letters.

zippitippitoes · 15/04/2007 19:06

the point is..i think..that they are not allowed to show a mother/baby

but is suspect they probably asked people and most people didn't recognise it was a mother and baby and so their lawyers passed it

FioFio · 15/04/2007 19:09

This reply has been deleted

Message withdrawn

FioFio · 15/04/2007 19:10

This reply has been deleted

Message withdrawn

zippitippitoes · 15/04/2007 19:13

this is a logo that does show breastfeeding

here

hunkermunker · 15/04/2007 19:17

I know how women hold babies to bottlefeed them, Fio... Usually they use a bottle though.