Active discussions

Meet the Other Phone. Only the apps you allow.

Meet the Other Phone.
Only the apps you allow.

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

Conservative Party advert promoting bottle feeding

53 replies

mamamea · 12/01/2009 12:23

uk.youtube.com/watch?v=_kbaXYPmjU0

Shame we don't live in a country where they could have shown the baby happily feeding NATURALLY without being inundated with complaints, and instead show it sucking on a bit of rubber.

OP posts:
madwomanintheattic · 12/01/2009 14:20

you're showing your age now

fruitstick · 12/01/2009 14:23

I can see this is going to turn into a bf vs ff debate but that really isn't the issue.

The fact is that health guidelines promote breastfeeding for the first 6 months (advertising of 1st stage milk banned etc) and certainly for the first 4 weeks.

The Conservatives ad agency are obviously completely oblivious to this which is not a good sign!

If they had the remotest awareness about the issue they would not have included a feeding baby at all, completely unnecessary.

fruitstick · 12/01/2009 14:23

sorry, lacking an apostrophe

NattyPlus2andAHalf · 12/01/2009 14:24

cant i point out there was no NEED to show feeding at all? it was about debt, not feeding a baby. would the image of a baby crying (cos its sad about the debt ) or something more fitting work better?

NattyPlus2andAHalf · 12/01/2009 14:25

wotulookinat sorry missed your point.

madwomanintheattic · 12/01/2009 14:35

i would have replicated the screaming baby image until there were a zillion on the screen, natty. but then i don't earn a fortune to design adverts lol.

francagoestohollywood · 12/01/2009 14:35

madwoman (but then again that movies is timeless! )

Original poster
mamamea · 12/01/2009 14:37

How is it promoting formula feeding? The advert mererly shows that bottle feeding exists

It's reinforcing the image that it is normal, convenient, etc.

Unnecessary

OP posts:
NattyPlus2andAHalf · 12/01/2009 14:39

madwoman, ah but u would if you were

i wonder who is responsible for that awful advert then?

madwomanintheattic · 12/01/2009 14:48

they should've got virgin's pr to do it lol (a whole other thread running...)

BouncingTurtle · 12/01/2009 15:44

It's a 4 week old being bottlefed... sorry but I feel quite strongly that although we need to be very supportive of people who do ff, we should avoid normalisation of bottlefeeding. Formula is there for people who can't or won't breastfeed - and bloody good job too as no-one would deny that formula has saved children's lives but it should never be considered the default way to feed a baby.

Tortington · 12/01/2009 15:49

yeah the conservatives are clearly evil fuckers. dont vote for them.

tittybangbang · 12/01/2009 16:16

Reckon the choice to show the baby bottlefeeding instead of being held/bf by the mum is completely deliberate and cynical. They need to appeal to working class voters to win the next election. Working class people in this country overwhelmingly choose to bottlefeed. This is the Tories attempting to show solidarity with the habits and values of ordinary parents.

They don't give a damn about guardian reading, extended breastfeeding, bleeding heart liberals (like myself ) because we wouldn't vote for them anyway.

As Custardo say. Evil fuckers.

Nancy66 · 12/01/2009 16:17

Fuck me you lot over analyse everything.

chancelloroftheexCHEQUERS · 12/01/2009 16:21

I accept the points made about normalising bottle feeding.

However, I think it's clear from the way the comments regarding the bottle have been received on youtube that many people will just dismiss objections to this as yet more 'breastfeeding mafia' crazy talk.

I can think of better battles to pick. Not because it's not a worthy one, but because it will just add fuel to the anti-lactivist fire.

BouncingTurtle · 12/01/2009 16:23

Nancy - clearly we haver too much time on our hands

chancelloroftheexCHEQUERS · 12/01/2009 17:59

I really thought this one would run and run!

BouncingTurtle · 12/01/2009 18:15

I seem to be threadkiller extraodinaire today...

c0nfusedad · 13/01/2009 00:33

hmmm, is it not possible that a) the baby was with the father, not the mother when this was filmed and that b) the milk in the bottle was expressed?

fathers have to look after babies too.

I don't think this has anything to do with promoting bottle feeding, I think that just happens to be on your minds. This ad appears to be about debt.

non?

wenceslasmyeducation · 13/01/2009 07:44

It's a very small baby though isn't it? Expressing that early isn't generally recommended if the mother wants to continue breastfeeding.
I understand that fathers have to look after babies, but there's this one thing that only mothers can do. Why can't nappy changing be a bonding experience?

tiktok · 13/01/2009 07:51

I think there are better ways to use my energies, to be honest, but a lot of people in the bf support world won't agree and that's fine.

I raise an eyebrow when people say 'it could be EBM!' or 'hey, you know what, the dad could be feeding the baby!' Well - whaddaya know - who would ever have thought of that (der.....).

But if we think the ad is normalising ff, then it really does not matter if the baby is being fed by dad or with ebm. The whole thing could be photoshopped or created with CGI graphics (I don't think it is, but it could be - and on that point I note that Princess Fiona in Shrek doesn't bf....for no good reason I can see and it's an opportunity lost, IMO).

The clear impression is that here is 'everybaby' and how is 'everybaby' fed? You got it.

This does reflect reality - the majority of babies do get a bottle of formula (though this baby looks to me about three weeks old, when the majority of UK babies are breastfed).

But it does contribute to the general idea that babies = formula feeding, and that does not help overcome the cultural barriers that prevent prevent a normalisation of breastfeeding.

raisingrrrl · 13/01/2009 08:20

The problem is with the bottle, not the contents. It's the bottle appearing in the ad which is against the WHO Marketing Code. So the fact that it "might" be EBM is, frankly, irrelevant. Apart from anything else, the baby is being fed whilst lying flat on its back, which is the worst possible position for a baby to be fed in.

It's a terrible advert and it should be pulled. Did it remind anyone else of the Warm Front leaflet?

mamadiva · 13/01/2009 08:44

Goodness me I have a few points to make...

In Scotland we have an advert about BF that's on regularly, very nice advert so TBH I don't see the problem with a small clip with a bottle in, the way I see it right or wrong with this country the chances are for every baby that's BF there is another being FF, obviously I don't know the ratio but at a guess I would say there are probably about a third or so UK babies being FF, feel free to give me the details if you wish as I said I don't know for sure. So I think that yes FF is made out to be the norm on TV and ad's but I think we need to have a balance somewhere of BF and FF at the end of the day there will be some people who disagree with either issue being on TV.

We cannot continue to pick at every ad, programme and magazine that has an image of a bottle because quite frankly does it really affect anyone? As others have said could have been EBM, could have been a dad feeding it could have been a child who was unable to BF we don't and will never know the reasoning behind these things. Think of the mum sitting at home who was desperate to BF but couldn't, don't you think that it may give her some reassurrance?

We need better support and information on both methods of feeding and whilst I believe that BF should be more thoroughly promoted, as IIRC BFing ads are not shown in England? which obviously is not right that needs to be fixed out as does the information mothers who FF get, more accurate and honest info is needed!

Why don't you try campaigning for something that you can do something about rather than arguing about a dull, moronic advert, as that can't be changed now.

wenceslasmyeducation · 13/01/2009 08:55

But it's the principle of the thing - that a bottle of milk is symbolic of babies in our society. It pisses me off!
I had a heck of a time buying decorations for DS 'naming day' party thing, because they all had bottles and dummies on. Or tiny shoes, yuck!
It's the unthinking stereotyping of babyhood that is the problem.

fruitstick · 13/01/2009 09:14

But it's not about what's in the bottle, or how people feed their babies is it. As confused says it is actually an advert about debt.

The problem is that this advert is cynically trying to use newborn babies, and the resulting emotions, to make a cynical point about economic policy. The fact that there are issues surrounding how we feed our babies, or that there are WHO guidelines in place which ads have to adhere to, has completely passed them by because actually this advert has absolutely no relevance to child rearing. It's very unlikely that the issue was discussed at all, rather that a 20something ad exec got hold of a baby and wasn't sure what else to do with them.

If they would like to explain to me what is wrong with the Government's economic policy I will happily listen but 'Look, for some reason, it's really bad for your cute baby' is manipulative and patronising and I'm having none of it!