LACTNET Archives

Lactation Information and Discussion

LACTNET@COMMUNITY.LSOFT.COM

Options: Use Forum View

Use Monospaced Font
Show Text Part by Default
Show All Mail Headers

Message: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]
Topic: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]
Author: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]

Print Reply
Subject:
From:
Anne Merewood <[log in to unmask]>
Reply To:
Lactation Information and Discussion <[log in to unmask]>
Date:
Sun, 28 Dec 2003 12:10:28 -0500
Content-Type:
text/plain
Parts/Attachments:
text/plain (1 lines)
Here is a copy of the letter I sent to NPRs Morning Edition

Dear Editorial Team
I am writing to complain about the irresponsible and superficial nature of Rachel Jones' piece on the Morning Edition of 12/26, covering the National Breastfeeding Awareness Campaign. The actual story is, as was reported almost a month ago (12/4) in the New York Times, that, regardless of where one stands on the issues,  the infant formula manufacturers have effectively derailed an Ad Council, government-backed public health Campaign by approaching the US government via the American Academy of Pediatrics. The AAP accepts millions of dollars in sponsorship from the formula industry, and if the reporter had even scraped the surface of this story, she would have found that the AAP has been split by the way in which this issue was handled. Leadership went straight to the government after direct approaches from formula company representatives, without consulting membership or its own Breastfeeding Committee. Had she dug a little further, she would have seen that the AAP has acted similarly in previous situations (again I refer her to the NYT article and others they have published in the past).
The formula industry tactics are not far removed from the tactics employed over the years by tobacco manufacturers, and this report was either very naive or very hurriedly put together. 
It also used incredibly judgemental, non neutral reporting, such as "Gardner acknowledges that the leukemia research is relatively new but insists the Type I diabetes prevention data is solid." which undermines the validity of Dr. Gartner's words (incidentally, Dr. Gartner's name is also spelled incorrectly in the transcript). Indeed the piece is loaded with judgemental phraseology such as such as "suggests", "believes" "concedes" "claims" "insists" and "acknowledges" in an incredible example of subjective reporting.
I suggest that NPR pulls itself out of the mire on this one and investigates more thoroughly the actualities of this story. It is an investigative report waiting to be written
Anne Merewood 
Instructor of Pediatrics
Boston University School of Medicine

ATOM RSS1 RSS2