Please or to access all these features

Add post

Watch this thread

Save thread

Start a new thread

Flip thread

Hide thread

My feed

Active Unanswered threads

Getting started FAQ's

Unanswered threads Acronyms Talk guidelines

Hide shortcut buttons

Talk

Site stuff

Join our Innovation Panel to try new features early and help make Mumsnet better.

See all MNHQ comments on this thread

Flip

1 2 3 4

Original poster

MN now in cohorts with nestle? Body Shop ad on site

77 replies

fanjolina · 30/08/2010 21:38

Please tell me my eyes deceived me?!!!

Was that actually a Body Shop advert I saw on the side of my MN page? You have a Nestle-free zone logo on your homepage. Yet Body Shop is owned by Nestle (via L'oreal).

Please, please don't continue with this.

OP posts:

MNHQ

JustineMumsnet · 31/08/2010 16:10

Hi marchpane, yes we would currently on the basis that Nestle own a stake but don't have control.

Tee2072 · 31/08/2010 17:10

I am wondering if y'all who claim to boycott Nestle, really do.

What they own.

I'll get flamed, but I don't boycott them. Its an ineffectual method. The boycotts been going on for about 70 years and Nestle is still going strong.

So give MN a break.

LackingInspiration · 31/08/2010 17:22

Fine, if that's your policy, MNHQ, but don't have a Nestle free zone label on your website...you're not nestle free if you're doing on Baby Milk Action criteria and that's where the logo came from.

Tee - I really boycott Nestle, really and truly.

And fuck ineffectual methods - I boycott because I don't want anything unethical done in my name/with my money.

And it does work - it's worked before, and could work again.

ProfessorLaytonIsMyLoveSlave · 31/08/2010 17:41

It's not that difficult, Tee. As I said above, I don't even officially boycott Nestle and I very rarely buy any of those products. It would only take a tiny amount of extra effort to boycott them altogether (in fact, I've been pleasantly surprised at how little extra effort it would take so I might just go ahead and do it).

Original poster

fanjolina · 31/08/2010 19:31

IF you don't boycott all of the companies on the babymilk action site, then you can't display the nestle- free zone logo. You have to come down on one side of the fence or the other, not hover in the middle depending on your driver (appealing to ethics vs commercial interest).

And Tee - I do boycott all on that list. I have changed hairdressers cos they switched to l'oreal products, won't by my DD the Cheryl Cole album cos she advertises L'oreal, and have even resorted to buying wine on a train trip cos the only water they stocked was Buxton!

OP posts:

AlCrowley · 31/08/2010 21:04

Actually Nestle free here too. List was good though as it's always good to get a reminder of what to avoid

Shaz10 · 31/08/2010 21:05

fanjolina LOL at "resorted". I might use that excuse a few times too :o

Marchpane · 31/08/2010 21:09

I don't do the boycott. I do avoid Nestle products where I can, like some others on this thread, but I don't actively check the boycott list and I haven't thrown away any cosmetics since finding out they are Nestle owned - although when they run out I'll buy from someone else.

However, I also don't go around with a label on saying I boycott Nestle and courting publicity on the back of it.

Come on MN either do it properly or take the label off your site. You can't have it both ways. You decide which, but choose which side of the fence you're gonna be on.

Ineedsomesleep · 31/08/2010 21:24

Yes Tee, I really do and I check the list on Baby Milk Action every now and then just to make sure.

Agree with the other posters, MN you either have to agree to not taking advertising from any of the companies on the current list, including Bodyshop, or you have to take the logo down.

LynetteScavo · 31/08/2010 21:38

It is easy to avoid Nestle if you really want to, and put your mind to it.(Personally I avoid if there is a choice, but I'm not religious about it)
But for those braying for MN's blood over this, you should be aware of L'oreal brands And make sure you don't use any of them.

Ineedsomesleep · 31/08/2010 21:43

I wouldn't say I was braying for MN's blood. Just think that they shouldn't be using the logo whilst taking the cash.

Oartistic · 31/08/2010 21:44

I objected to the Labour party ads in May, but I really can't bring myself to get worked up about Body Shop ads on MN. I think Justine's response was sensible, and that objectors should get a grip.

I also personally think it's a mistake to refuse to buy, say, a Cheryl Cole CD for a daughter because she advertises L'Oreal. Refusing to buy it because it's crap is an entirely different matter, of course. I am quite sure that kind of thing won't win any child over to Worthy Causes.

Marchpane · 31/08/2010 21:45

I don't think any one's asking for blood - rather some clarity and integrity. Which is what I have come to expect from them because they're usually pretty good with their stances on other subjects.

MarsLady · 31/08/2010 21:45

I agree. You either display the nestle free zone logo and drop the Body Shop ad or you don't display and you continue with the revenue.

It's not too difficult to do.

winnybella · 31/08/2010 21:56

I agree as well- either or. You cannot have it both ways.

Ineedsomesleep · 31/08/2010 21:58

It seems a tad unfair to suggest that MN users who object to the use of the logo, whilst taking advertising revenue from Nestle should "get a grip".

Here is one of the reasons why I boycott Nestle.

Oartistic · 31/08/2010 22:21

Yes, sorry, that may have been a bit unfair. But I do think that MNHQ have to be realistic/pragmatic and that it is okay for them to dislike/detest Nestle and all it stands for - whilst also not tying themselves up in endless, unhelpful ethical knots about it. So I think they can actually have it both ways - and probaby should have it both ways, unless we want the site to end up folding due to lack of ad revenue. After all, the evil taint of Nestle is on so much stuff that it would be very, very hard to avoid it entirely.

LynetteScavo · 31/08/2010 22:45

"After all, the evil taint of Nestle is on so much stuff that it would be very, very hard to avoid it entirely."

I agree.

Marchpane · 31/08/2010 22:52

If MN goes under because they don't run a couple of Body Shop ads I'll eat my hat. And a flaming Kit Kat

Oartistic · 01/09/2010 09:02

Marchpane, you know that's not what I said. So why paraphrase it in such a silly way?

MNHQ

JustineMumsnet · 01/09/2010 10:31

Thanks for the input - I think the best thing would be for us to have a frank conversation with Baby Milk Action about our position and see what they would rather us do. They may rather we highlight their campaign even if we don't adhere to it in it's entirety. In addition we can talk about how we can publicise and support their work.

In the meantime (while we set up that meeting) we'll take down the ad on the home page.

Oartistic · 01/09/2010 18:48

It's a shame to let yourselves be browbeaten by a vocal minority, MNHQ.

Marchpane · 01/09/2010 19:14

Thanks Justine that looks very sensible

SeaShellsOnTheSeaShore · 02/09/2010 07:31

Sounds great Justine :)

PfftTheMagicDragon · 02/09/2010 09:47

I think that if you don't adhere to the campaign in it's entirety then you don't adhere to it.

MN can advertise who they like, it's up to them, I'm not going to get annoyed at who they choose to put on the site.

But if you are not adhering to the campaign fully then you should not pop the logo up there as if you do.

Flip

1 2 3 4

Swipe left for the next trending thread