There’s been impassioned discussion about the Nestle Family blogger event in Los Angeles, initiated (I believe) by a thoughtful post by Annie of PhD in Parenting, and followed by the comments and tweets of many, many others (see in particular, @that_danielle and @isabelkallman for interesting facts and comments). I was invited to the Nestle event, debated attendance considerably, then declined. And as I have watched the dialogue ensue on Twitter, a number of thoughts and concerns have been percolating.
First, let me start with the matter of my attendance at the Nestle Family blogger event.
I always consider blog junkets carefully, but have had to be exceedingly picky in the last year, as events and invitations have ballooned in volume. There are many reasons why a blogger decides to attend an event: it’s flattering to be invited, the location is cool, you want to meet other bloggers in real life, you’re already passionate about the brand, you want to learn more, it makes sense with your editorial point of view, etc.
My interactions with Nestle’s PR were positive; they understood that the event wasn’t the best editorial fit for an eco-geek like me. In addition to wanting to visit LA and see some of my blog friends, I did consider attending though, because I thought it could be a good opportunity to raise my eco-advocate voice. However, ultimately, as I debated this invite and the editorial fit along with family and client work, I just felt as if I was trying to knock a square peg in a round hole and declined.
Now, on to Annie’s post. She raises a lot of disturbing issues about Nestle’s formula strategy in third world companies. My first reaction was, “Holy sh*t, this is horrendous.” My second reaction was, “Wow, I can’t believe I didn’t know about the depths of this issue when I was contemplating the invitation.” (I did Google Nestle for potential legal issues and controversy and came up with a few hits, but ultimately didn’t probe further because I had pretty much decided not to go.) My third thought was, “I wish I could be there to raise a voice and work towards positive change.”
I think this Nestle Family situation has riled so many because it hits a lot of nerves.
First, while it may seem trivial juxtaposed in the same conversation with third world countries, immoral practices, and dying babies, there’s this very palpable ongoing business of blogger A-listing and feelings of exclusion that rear their ugly heads around blogger junkets. I’m afraid that sometimes there’s a tendency – possibly even an eagerness – to rain on a parade if one’s not invited to an event (this is not in referral to Annie’s post; I’m referring to what I see on Twitter).
Second, because the crux of this issue is around formula, it riles breastfeeding advocates and makes those who choose/chose not to breastfeed defensive. I have seen people tweet that this is not a breastfeeding vs. formula issue, it’s a moral one, and to some degree I understand that rationale, but I think it’s very, very challenging to truly disentangle these issues.
Third, there’s the general distrust of a big company like Nestle, no matter how you feel about formula or chocolate bars or whatever. I also have seen tweets about how Nestle’s unethical formula practices date back to the 70s and thus will never ever change (more on that below).
So, what to make of all of this? There are three things that have been weighing on my mind this morning:
1. There’s been a lot of criticism about this event, and whether people acknowledge it or not, I think this inevitably trickles down negatively to the attendees. Now, the reality is that none of us completely knows why a blogger decides to attend an event (select from any of the above or other reasons); indeed, my own thought process about it felt rather convoluted. So the first thing I ask is to put down the judgment of others in attendance and see what they have to report on the flip side. I don’t personally know many of the bloggers in attendance but I can vouch for the fact that veterans such as @busymom, @mombloggersclub, and @momtalkradio know how to separate wheat from chaff.
2. Every blog event brings forth lessons, and in my opinion, this one clearly points to the importance of disclosure and encouragement of open dialogue at the outset. Given that this event involves parenting bloggers, it seems as if Nestle should have anticipated that someone would bring these issues to the surface. They would have done better to address the issue head on. Honestly, if Nestle had said that the formula issue was on the agenda I may have been more compelled to go.
3. I think it’s wrong to assume that nothing can change, especially in this day and age of social media. We saw it with Motrin and I experienced it firsthand when Boston.com tried to sponge off of Boston Mamas. For better or worse, people can make themselves heard loud and clear through social media and change can happen. Ad campaigns (such as Motrin and Boston.com) obviously are different in scope than the practices Annie’s post described, but I still believe that from the consumer end, things are very, very different than they used to be. We have much more power now.
All challenges afford growth (isn’t suffering and subsequent growth part of the human condition?) and I can only hope that this situation will inspire Nestle towards change and also encourage all of us to engage the power of this online space to positive gain.
I am embarassed to admit that I did not know any of this about Nestle. I have been reading about the controversy as a result of the blogger junket and also didn’t like what I learned.
But I also know that there are 3 sides to every story.
As for accepting or decling the junket invite. While I’m pretty popular when it comes to local events
, I am not typically invited to junkets that involve travel (NO idea why that is). And while I definitely notice that it’s the same names everywhere and I do think it’s sort of boring, I’m not sour-grapes about it, because it is what it is. That said, I am not judging any of those bloggers who accepted the ticket, because like you said, it’s not up to me to guess what someone’s incentive might be. I’l be interested to hear what they come back with.
I am up for learning more about the Nestle controversy and their alleged lack of ethics. But I’m interested in learning about all sides of it.
[Reply]
This is a really thoughtful, well-reasoned post. I think you are spot on that the formula issue makes this particularly charged and touchy on both sides. Thank you.
Aside from–or, I suppose, in addition to–the Nestle event, I’ve been thinking and tweeting a lot today about these blogger events in general. I used to be A-OK with them because, as somebody who came from a more traditional print journalism background, I viewed them as sort of hybrid press trips/press conferences, with bloggers being the journalists who would attend and then use their reasoning and research skills to illuminate the real story. As I view the “opportunity” to travel away from my family, arrange child care, take away from my paid work, and live on somebody else’s schedule for a day or three as more of an obligation than compensation, I didn’t see too much of a conflict of interests. And I’ve never gone to one of these events so I didn’t really consider how different they might be from the kind of press trip I have been on in the past.
But I’m starting to realize that these aren’t really press junkets at all, but sort of a hybrid focus group/PR event where the event becomes as much of the message as the product and bloggers are being used not just to disseminate information but to act as unpaid consultants, too.
The whole thing honestly has me confused. I am starting to wonder what’s in it for anyone but the company putting on the event. If a blogger goes, she is immediately seen as a spokesperson for the company, because she’s been wined and dined. But if not for the wining and dining there is zero incentive to go, because these events are also unpaid (and often require significant childcare cost and hassle for the bloggers to attend).
At least if the bloggers were compensated, it would be very clear that it’s a PR event. As it stands, nobody seems quite sure what the role of the blogger is supposed to be, what the relationship between the blogger and the company really is, and who is obligated to whom.
[Reply]
I do not assume anything about those in attendance. My only concern is when I see, “What’s the big deal?” or posts or tweets that imply that they asked, Nestle answered, and that is that, problem solved.
Nestle’s practices (and not just in formula) have been atrocious. Nestle needs to stop and take steps to undo some of the damage they did.
I just hope that the bloggers involved do their own research and consider future communications about the event in light of what they discover.
[Reply]
Great points, Meagan. I actually don’t get invited to many myself (must be all the f-bombs) unless they’re through Cool Mom Picks, and I’ve taken to asking for a lot of details about the event itself.
Like you said, press junkets are one thing and do not lend themselves to endorsements or associations of a specific nature. We’re going as press to learn if something is a good fit for our blog.
But it gets a little tricky when they’re asking bloggers to come out and then make them a focus group and pick their brains. It turns into consulting work which really should be paid (trip aside).
[Reply]
You nailed it. I think all discussion has to start somewhere. This Twitter debate has frustrated me and I’ve almost unfollowed a few people this week because of it. There’s no way I could judge the people who are there right now. That’s not my place. I’m looking forward to seeing what comes of this and how Nestle responds. I want to be an informed consumer.
[Reply]
I am so happy that Nestle is doing this event for exactly this reason. I think more people should know about the issues of Artificial Breast Milk (ABM) cos and their history vis-a-vis the Wold Health Organization and its code.
Also, I am of the opinion that just because some bloggers are at the event doesn’t mean they agree or aren’t aware of these issues.
Also, Meagan I would hope that people would be smarter than assuming one is a spokesperson for a company just because they accepted an opportunity to meet with company mgmt (even if it included a trip). But I understand your concerns.
Lastly, I became aware of the ban on accepting advertising dollars from formula companies when I was asked by childbirth and parenting professionals to put in their contracts that I would not accept advertising dollars from ABM companies.
Moreover, I hope this highlights the work of the WHO whose message is that marketing & advertising promote the image of breastfeeding in the media as much as possible. I’m confident that even Nestle will tell any mom that breast is best.
[Reply]
I think it’s interesting to hear your thoughts on why/how bloggers choose their junkets. While I think it’s true that most in the U.S. are unaware of Nestle’s long-standing policies/practices re: formula abroad, over decades, it does surprise me that some high-caliber, very intelligent bloggers are attending. I’m following the tweets now and am waiting for more to happen besides Nestle getting a chance to try to smooth over their image with a new group of mom-fluencers. So far it seems just like a photo op for Nestle and a pat on the back from their investors.
[Reply]
Candace, this: “I do not assume anything about those in attendance. My only concern is when I see, “What’s the big deal?” or posts or tweets that imply that they asked, Nestle answered, and that is that, problem solved.” — is a really good point.
I have seen a lot of talk about how Nestle is going to set the facts straight, end of story! that seems pretty naive to me. Nestle is going to present the version of the truth that puts them in the best possible light. If bloggers are concerned with presenting the unbiased truth, they’ll need to go beyond that. (And if we readers are interested in knowing the truth, so will we).
[Reply]
Meagan, thanks for your thoughtful comments. I agree that things are rather murky these days. My viewpoint is in line with Kristen’s — I’ll attend if it’s clearly a learning event that could offer interesting editorial (similar to Kristen, I ask a lot of questions, which sometimes apparently is viewed as rather annoying… see http://popdiscourse.com/2009/07/bad-blogger-outreach-ii/) but if I hear things like “advice” or “pick your brain” etc etc. I come back with a consulting fee.
I think some agencies DO get it. I’m actually heading out this weekend as part of Brand About Town’s inaugural advisory board. They are bringing a few of us to a spa to brainstorm and there is a stipend. Our responsibilities are very clearly defined. It clearly is a consulting gig and is not murky at all.
I honestly don’t know how long blogger junkets will last… I agree wth Jennifer James’s post some time ago that there will be a new wave, where bloggers are hired for their consulting services (as is already starting to happen).
-Christine
[Reply]
I’m headed out the the GlaxoSmithKline vaccination production facility tomorrow – paid for by GSK – to tour the plant (along with some other mom bloggers.) I’ve never been invited to anything like this before, but my “anti-establishment” self isn’t 100% comfortable with the idea, but I convinced myself that it would be educational (which I think it will be.) But when I tell my friend with an autistic child that I’m going, her response is “Great, can you ask them for $100,000 in physical therapy expenses for giving my child autism?” I don’t know if she’s wrong (though I’m not totally convinced that vaccinations are the cause of all evils). The Nestle hoopla makes me wonder if I didn’t just force that square peg into that round hole all for the price of a plane ticket? When I ask others about this, they say there’s no comparison.
So, I’m asking your opinion, since you seem like you’ve been around the block with these things. Do you think it’s the same or similar? And how would you feel about the trip? I’m trying to find a way to work this out in my head because I don’t know what to think about it.
[Reply]
Hi TheFeministBreeder,
Thanks for commenting in — I actually was invited to the GSK event too and was very interested to attend; my perspective being that of someone who tends to be rather anti-interventionist. I wanted to learn more about what they had to say and also challenge them on some of the issues. I think your friend has given you an entry point (along with any other concerns you have). It’s relevant to bring up and I would be rather surprised if GSK isn’t prepared for challenging perspectives to be present.
Your comment actually makes me think — as a former scientist my perspective is always one of challenging what is in front of me. I don’t sit and nod and just take it all in, I look for critical angles and ask questions. I think that’s one of the best and most powerful and productive things you can do at events like these. Raise your concerns and voice. Otherwise, the presentations are just a glorified press release.
best, Christine
[Reply]
Thank you @Christine – that helps. I don’t know why I’m so nervous about this, other than I tend to be verrrrry non-confrontational (in person anyway, online is a whole different story!) and the questions I have for them are not softballs. It’s hard for me to separate the “big-pharm-is-evil” part of me from the part of me that really does want to hear what they have to say. I suppose you could say I’m just intimidated. I want this trip to be useful for myself and my readers so I’m analyzing the crap out of it. Maybe I can take some Paxil and relax.
[Reply]
Will the Nestle family bloggers look at the evidence or just relay what Nestle tells them?
http://boycottnestle.blogspot.com/2009/09/nestle-family-twitters.html
[Reply]
I think this post is awesome Christine, and so are so many of the comments. I’ve been echoing Megan’s pov for a while now – PR and marketing needs to make it clear to bloggers just what’s expected of them. Those bloggers are now being called the Nestle Bloggers and I’m sure some of them don’t like it. I wouldn’t want to be called the _____ blogger simply because I attended a press event.
I’m also really glad to see you bring up the fact that Nestle didn’t properly arm the bloggers with info and a modicum of support as to how to deflect the formula questions that were inevitable.
I would also challenge brands to consider in whose hands they place their brands. There are some incredibly thoughtful women at that event. There are also some whose tweets are so painfully juvenile, it makes me think that right now, Nestle is having some major second thoughts about all this.
There. I said it.
[Reply]
This is an important contribution to the discussion – I’ve attended blogger events (in one case, anyway) precisely because I *did* disagree with certain practices and wanted to a) have my say within the context of live dialogue, and b) hear their say (dialogue, dialogue, dialogue). So although I agree wholeheartedly with Annie about the need to raise awareness of the very serious problems with Nestle, I do think that raising such awareness doesn’t preclude blogger interaction with such companies. The whole problem whereby mom-bloggers are labeled reactionary stems from shutting down dialogue on certain issues – just because some issues seem more obviously one-sided than others doesn’t mean that dialogue should stop.
[Reply]
I had no idea about the issue swirling around this event. Thanks so much for such a balanced and thoughtful post to get me up to speed.
[Reply]
Catherine, I think our parallel academic backgrounds serve us similarly.
Your comment speaks to a paragraph I had originally drafted but did not include (it felt as if I was going off on a tangent…). In the past I have attended two events where I attended specifically to learn more and because I had some concerns that I wanted to press back on.
In the invitation stage, both companies laid out the agenda — which addressed a range of issues including some of the ones I was concerned about. These actions demonstrated to me that they were interested in dialogue, not just having us absorb the corporate schpiel.
That’s why (re: closing point 2 above) I think Nestle would have done so much better by building the controversies into their agenda. By not doing so about an issue so directly relevant to their target group, it just seems as if they were trying to hide something, or hope nobody would notice.
-Christine
[Reply]
You go girl.
[Reply]
Having attended events both sponsored by GM and as a guest of GM, I observed fellow attendees from sites such as Treehugger asking many hardball questions of GM executives. I was impressed by GM’s willingness to engage them as guests and to connect them with execs, and I was impressed by these attendees’ respect for GM’s outreach and their genuine interest in asking questions vice hurling accusations.
I’ve sent several questions to Nestle and at least one event attendee via Twitter – not softballs, either – but I’m asking with respect and genuine interest. I want to understand and feel satisfied with the explanations I receive.
And while I’m still unsatisfied as yet with the answers I’ve gotten, I must give Nestle credit for engaging directly on Twitter and on posts such as Annie’s.
[Reply]
I agree most strongly about not judging the bloggers in attendance. I think that people should AT LEAST wait until the bloggers have written up their thoughts after the event and go from there. There are MANY different areas of Nestle and to just focus on one area of disagreement doesn’t mean that the bloggers have lost their integrity. That just doesn’t seem right/fair to me…
[Reply]
[...] at Pop discourse wrote On Bloggers, Breastfeeding, Formula, Morality, Change, & the Nestle Family Event and talks about why she chose not to attend the #NestleFamily event and how all of this impacts [...]
Great post. I understand what Meagan is saying, because all of the “Nestle does this great charitable thing” and other factoid Tweets from attendees are absolutely PR. PR that they have decided to endorse. If that were not part of the exchange, companies would continue to work with anonymous focus groups. As you say, the event invitation came from Nestle PR an is funded by them as PR activities. I completely endorse blogger’s interest in taking that role, but then they might get the same kind of pushback that a PR rep for that company might get it they are passing on suspect info from a disreputable company. I don’t agree with personal attacks, but the majority of the pushback was not attacking.
[Reply]
Chiming in to second what Kim (Mom in the City) said. I recently attended a similar event for the Smart Choices Program. I was nervous about it because I knew going in I would probably disagree with it, but I also thought it would be good for me to hear about it from those who believe in it. I went in ready to ask questions, respectfully, and give them a chance to prove that it was indeed a beneficial program. Unfortunately, I came away disappointed, and I carefully constructed my post about the event to express my disappointment but to do so with respect.
A few weeks later, when more publicity about the program began to surface, and I saw some of the junk foods that received the label, I updated my post and admitted that I could not endorse the program at all.
All this to say, I think it is fine for a blogger to attend an event sponsored by a company that they may not entirely believe in as long as they are willing to be constructive and as long as the company doesn’t request beforehand that they give a strictly positive review.
A blogger should certainly not be judged for going, and neither should her presence be seen as an endorsement.
That said, she must realize when she does accept the invitation that there could be backlash to follow, because unfortunately that seems to happen more often than not.
[Reply]
I don’t trust Nestle for anything. Their 3rd world practices are just the tip of the iceberg. They also spearheaded the normalization of formula in the 50s in the states, let’s not forget. And much of their chocolate is harvested by child slave labor.
I don’t think a company like that is going to change. It would take a polar shift on the scale of a meteorite and them starting over in the rubble for me to trust that company. I don’t think a company like theirs should have any place in family communication like blogging.
And no, I wasn’t invited.
[Reply]
It might be good if some of you spoke to those of us who actually attended the event.
[Reply]
Great post. I’m like you, I wish I could be there to actually help create positive change. I am disappointed by the negativity that I saw come out from those that attended (some of them) and the name calling and rude comments.
I think good things will come of this and I know that there were tweets on this dividing the blogger world and we are all one but really that is not the case. We are all different, we all have different views but we all do have blogs, content and influence of some sort and need to keep this in mind. What type of influence do you want to have, how do you want to use it and what is important to each blogger is different. I always try to keep this in mind – there is a person behind that profile and blog.
[Reply]
I don’t buy Nestle products, I don’t condone their practices, but I still don’t get the boycott. As I said on Annie’s post, I think the attendees should do their research and use this as an opportunity to bring up the issues, if nothing else to make Nestle aware that their customers know about them and are not falling for the lame excuses. They are all about sales – when they realize that their practices ARE hurting their sales and no amount of PR can cover their tracks, they will be forced to change something. Aren’t we always saying it has to start somewhere? It might start with bloggers then.
So I agree with you that it comes down to the attendees: what they do and how much they let themselves get sucked in, or if they can use this to do some good.
But I can’t stand the “holier than thou” speeches of those who chose to boycott, like it automatically puts them on higher ground. “we won’t talk to them ’cause they won’t listen anyway” Huh? That makes no sense.
[Reply]
I agree with Busymom that we wish people would speak to us and not at or attack us, we were bringing the concerns of those to Nestle and in turn Nestle started a twitter acct and an email so they can be contacted.
I am very much hoping this is a situation that will be used to do some good and answer some questions for those that have had concerns. We did bring up many of the concerns and I personally have some video of some of the answers. I hope to get them posted on my blog in the coming week or two.
[Reply]
[...] tweets – I’m sure you don’t want to dilute the trust you’ve built. I really admired this post by an invitee who, though tempted to take a trip to CA and see friends, declined because the [...]
[...] From Kristine at Popdiscourse On Bloggers, Breastfeeding, Formula, Morality, Change, & the Nestle Family Event [...]
[...] my point is this. In recent months I have been wrestling with Jon over blog trips and becoming super picky about events that I will attend. Obviously a party and a live show are a lot different than a blogger junket, [...]