> I heard it and was impressed that it was quite balanced. They
 > interviewed our own Amy Spangler and Dr. Larry Gartner. I was happy
with
 > that. Yes, they did talk with reps. from the AAP and the formula
 > industries, but I did not feel the spot was slanted toward them at
all.

it wasn't so much the slant in the report as what they were actually
reporting that gets me fired up. this was the first confirmation of my
suspicions - that the ads are not ever going to run; that the ads were
effectively blocked by ABM interests. for the last month or 2 we have
been told that the campaign was delayed by garden-variety ad campaign
delays that were not specifically related to its content. also, hearing
the evidence against formula feeding damned out loud like that seems
outrageous. the evidence is solid, and that seed of doubt is now
planted.

OTOH, the neutral balance of the report DOES bother me since they
should not be neutral - there is clearly a "good guy" and a "bad guy"
here but the breastfeeding ads and those behind it were treated with
the same suspicion, doubtful speaking tone, and implied questioning of
truth as the ABM company's tactics. It's like giving equal time to RJ
Reynolds company to refute what is obvious, scientific, public health,
non-commercially motivated evidence. it's like showing the ad with the
woman on a ventilator talking through her trach tube about how much she
regrets ever smoking, then cutting to tobacco exec to hear him say "but
there's no evidence these are connected".

letting them raise false doubts and then letting it stand is worse than
not reporting on it at all - there is a political campaign tactic, a
very dirty one, that uses this technique. mention something bad (and
patently untrue) about the opponent as a "last word", preferably
something less tangible and harder to prove wrong to the general lay
public. a candidate did this by asking "what would you think of
[opposing candidate] if you found out that he cheated on his wife and
had illegitimate children?" - it was untrue, but this was enough to
plant a seed in listeners minds; one they could not easily prove wrong
with the information they had.

the general public depends heavily on industry and scientists (who are
often the same) to *tell us what the evidence means*. people don't read
research, they get the judgement from the nightly news. people who hear
this NPR show will come away with the idea that "[all] the research
promoting breastfeeding is faulty!". the seed is planted. the warehouse
of published data we have detailing all the factors that make "not
breastfeeding" so risky are now held in doubt.

Michelle DePesa


             ***********************************************

To temporarily stop your subscription: set lactnet nomail
To start it again: set lactnet mail (or digest)
To unsubscribe: unsubscribe lactnet
All commands go to [log in to unmask]

The LACTNET mailing list is powered by L-Soft's renowned
LISTSERV(R) list management software together with L-Soft's LSMTP(R)
mailer for lightning fast mail delivery. For more information, go to:
http://www.lsoft.com/LISTSERV-powered.html