[PEN-L:9442] Nestle Boycott Continues (fwd)

[D Shniad <shniad@xxxxxx>]

> Date:         Wed, 9 Apr 1997 19:06:45 -0400
> Sender: Forum on Labor in the Global Economy <LABOR-L@xxxxxxxx>
> From: Sam Lanfranco <lanfran@xxxxxxxx>
> Subject:      Nestle Boycott Continues (fwd)
> To: LABOR-L@xxxxxxxx
>
> /* Written 12:42 AM  Apr  9, 1997 by twn in igc:twn.features */
> /* ---------- "Nestle Boycott Continues" ---------- */
> INTERNATIONAL BOYCOTT AGAINST NESTLE CONTINUES
>
> The international boycott against Nestle for its unethical
> marketing of infant formula was first launched in July 1977. Today,
> the boycott is still very much alive, because of the company's
> persistence in violating the International Code of Marketing of
> Breast-milk Substitutes.
>
> By Mary Assunta
> Third World Network Features
>
>
>      The international boycott against Nestle is very much alive
> since its launch two decades ago. This boycott is still on because
> Nestle continues to employ unethical marketing tactics in many
> countries.
>
>      Nestle  is one of the world's largest food manufacturers, with
> a turnover of US$42 billion. It controls approximately 40% of the
> worldwide market for baby food. It influences UN systems, food
> legislation, market trends and company behaviour more  than  any
> other food company.
>
>      Nestle's persistence in violating the World Health
> Organisation (WHO)'s International  Code  of Marketing of
> Breast-milk Substitutes was once again revealed in a four-country
> research commissioned by the Interagency Group on Breastfeeding
> Monitoring (IGBM).  Entitled 'Cracking  the  Code', the report
> reveals the massive scale of company  marketing  malpractice.
>
>      Initially Nestle dismissed the IGBM report, even before
> reading it, and announced on BBC World Service that it would not
> 'accept reproaches from self-appointed groups'. However in the
> face of the scandalous findings a week later Nestle changed  its
> tune to, 'We take this report seriously.'
>
>      According to the latest Update of Baby Milk Action's Boycott
> News, the international boycott is having an important impact on
> Nestle, not only in direct economic terms but also in wielding
> damage to its corporate image, management morale and management
> time the company must spend combating it.
>
>      The Update reports that in recent years many companies have
> reversed policies as a result of public pressure, to the benefit of
> people, the environment and their own image. Nestle  however has
> only curbed some of its more blatant malpractices.
>
>      The Update states that Nestle's latest efforts in countering
> the boycott is to advertise itself as a squeaky clean beneficial
> force by distorting facts. An advertisement which appeared in the
> Oxford Independent claims that even before the introduction of the
> WHO Code, '... Nestle marketed infant formula ethically and
> responsibly and has done so ever since.'
>
>      The Update however cites some examples of Nestle's promotions
> in India where there are laws to prevent companies from advertising
> infant formula. Nestle has come around this by aggressively
> promoting other expensive processed baby food products with
> idealised pictures of babies on the tins and in a language locals
> don't understand. Such promotions continue to undermine
> breastfeeding.
>
>      Nestle is the sole advertiser of baby foods in the Indian
> edition of Parenting magazine and its Cerelac advertisements are
> found in pharmacies. It even offers cash incentives for local
> salespersons to display products. A pharmacist in Jaipur said that
> only Nestle representatives are offering payment in return for a
> prominent display of baby foods. He receives 200 rupees each month.
>
>
>      The Update also points out that the advertisement in the
> Oxford Independent makes no mention of criminal charges against
> Nestle in India or the company's challenge to the Indian law, or
> its attempts to  undermine  strong  baby food legislation in  the
> Philippines,  Ghana,  Pakistan, Uganda and Europe.
>
>      The advertisement mentions Nestle's new Charter on its infant
> formula policy in developing countries. However despite its
> attempts to whitewash its real practices with a feeble Charter the
> truth is Nestle continues to undermine legislation in many
> countries, promote its products through health facilities, give
> gifts to health workers and has never disciplined its staff for
> violating the International Code.
>
>      While Nestle's biggest complaint has been over-regulation and
> has been actively undermining attempts to bring about strong baby
> food legislation in many countries, ironically it is calling  for
> legislations of a different kind to be strictly enforced.
>
>      Nestle wants its corporate brand - the nest - to be protected
> and  entrenched in the law and strictly enforced by the
> authorities. The Update reports that Nestle's Vice President, Peter
> Brabeck, made  this call for better brand protection and speedy
> trade deregulation when addressing government representatives of
> developing countries at the October 1996 Global Investment Forum
> organised by the United Nations Conference on Trade and
> Development (UNCTAD).
>
>      He  said, '... Our corporate brand - the nest - is the seal,
> it takes our  products out of anonymity which one might find with
> other products...  The consumers' trust helps  us  to  introduce
> completely new  concepts...'
>
>      For decades Nestle has used 'the nest' to get mothers to
> 'trust' in their products which have caused suffering to infants
> all over the world. This is indeed a scandalous betrayal of trust,
> especially of the poor from developing countries.
>
>      In the face of Nestle's continuous irresponsible marketing
> practices, the  international boycott against the company is still
> on in 17 countries. This boycott will continue till Nestle stops
> its irresponsible behaviour. - Third World Network Features
>
> -ends-
>
>
> About the writer: Mary Assunta is a media officer with the
> Consumers' Association of Penang in Malaysia.  This article is
> based on information from Boycott News, supplement to Baby Milk
> Action, Update  20, February/March 1997.
>
>
> When reproducing this feature, please credit Third World Network
> Features and (if applicable) the cooperating magazine or agency
> involved in the article, and give the byline. Please send us
> cuttings.
>
>
> For more information, please contact:
>
> Third World Network
> 228, Macalister Road, 10400 Penang, Malaysia.
>
> Email: twn@xxxxxxxxxxx; twnpen@xxxxxxxxx
> Tel: (+604)2293511,2293612 & 2293713;
> Fax: (+604)2298106 & 2264505
>
>
> 1584/97
>