I live in New York and read the New York Times daily.  I'm also aware of 
all the different ways to frame the debate on this issue, since I'm a 
breastfeeding advocate. The Times chose what they usually choose, 
especially in the Sunday magazine: to target the worries of an upper 
class person, portray these worries as  neurotic, and use somewhat 
inflammatory language to make the issue "sexy".  The banner headline was 
an image of a worried, skinny woman nursing with vaguely reassuring 
tones: this is the Times' image of their audience.  The real take home 
message is /not/ on the banner headline:  on every measure formula fed 
babies have much worse outcomes than  babies fed "contaminated" milk. 
You can find this buried in the print, which most people don't read.

And the other big issue which is not addressed anywhere is that no one 
is testing formula for contaminants.

Every news outlet has a bias, and rhetoric which verges on propaganda is 
found in even the most staid venues.


Kate Sharp
LC in NYC
[log in to unmask]

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

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