By Richa Naidu

LONDON (Reuters). – Stephanie Labarta was just six months old when she saw an occasional advert for infant formula on Instagram (NASDAQ:). A year later, she still sees adverts for Nestle’s Gerber Good Start and Reckitt Benckiser’s Enfamil.

“Gerber actually came up this morning on my feed – it started off with a contest to submit your smiling baby and then it trickled into the different types of formulas and what they have available,” said Labarta, a senior analyst at a nonprofit in New York.

Labarta was also surprised to receive an unexpected care package via an online registry, which included an infant formula sample shortly after the social media ad flurry began.

Such marketing represents what the World Health Organization describes in a report released Friday as “inappropriate promotion of breast-milk substitutes” via digital media.

Friday’s report builds on WHO research published in February that flagged broader “aggressive” marketing tactics in the industry, which is set to grow to more than $54 billion in formula sales this year, according to Euromonitor.

According to WHO research, “Breast milk substitutes companies purchase direct access to mothers and pregnant women in their most vulnerable times from social media platforms. Apps, online registrations, and babyclubs are used to collect information about mothers and then send them personalized breast-milk substitutions promotion emails.

In Western countries, what Labarta experienced is “very common practice,” Laurence Grummer-Strawn, one of the report’s authors, told Reuters. They’re using digital technology (to get the addresses of these women), to identify that they are pregnant, and to put them on lists for this kind of distribution.

WHO monitors the marketing practices of the industry and has created an informal code for conduct in 1981 for companies. It recommends that newborns are exclusively breastfed, where feasible, because it is the best option. For many parents, formula is the best option.

Reckitt, Danone, and Nestle are all encouraging parents to breastfeed. They also have strict guidelines that detail what they can do and say to mothers.

Mabel Lu (Danone’s global head for digital transformation), stated that although it is true that women “constantly reach out by targeted content online”, the main problem lies in algorithms that automatically display ads on social media platforms that they believe are relevant.

Reckitt claimed that it gives parents essential information on the best diet for their children and maintains compliance with all relevant local laws regarding marketing. These regulations are sometimes stricter than the WHO codes.

Nestle is the biggest food and beverage company in the world. It has announced it will no longer promote infant formula to babies under 6 months of age worldwide starting at the end 2022. Nestle doesn’t currently promote infant formula to babies under twelve months old in 163 nations. Nestle agrees with some of these people.

Marie Chantal Messier from Nestle’s global head for food and industry affairs, said that anyone in China could buy formula in Australia, and then sell it on their own website. It’s often difficult to get people to understand the WHO code, so it can be challenging for them.”

Grummer-Strawn from WHO stated that “they raise a fair point about the fact that multiple actors are involved in this.” But it’s unfair to “absolve them of responsibility…they pay marketers, they sponsor the various entities that are sharing misinformation,” he added.

#FORMULAFORHAPPINESS

For Friday’s report, the WHO analysed data from 4 million social media posts about infant feeding over a six-month period using a commercial social listening platform. Posts reached more than 2.47 Billion people and were liked, shared, or commented on by 12 million. The WHO monitored 264 brand accounts for breast-milk substitutes brands. They posted content approximately 90 times per days and reached 229,000,000 users.

The amount of advertising that the US infant formula industry used on Reddit (Facebook, Instagram, Twitter and Twitter) almost doubled in 2017 versus 2017. According to Nielsen The data revealed that digital marketing was more popular than any type of advertising for infant formula sales last year.

Maria Sipka co-founder Linqia’s influencer market agency Linqia. She said that while 5% to 5% of infant nutrition brands budgets were used for influencer marketing in the past, this could now be 25% to 50%.

Sipka stated, “It must not smell like it is a promotion.”

Linqia clients briefed by Reuters showed influencer mothers being told by an unknown food company that their infant formula contains a “probiotic clinically proven to reduce crying by as much as 50% in colicky infants.” This formula can be used for formula-fed babies.

It was suggested that mothers “start their blog stories by sharing excitement for the partnership with the brand”, and share the story of how the brand provided comfort to their child. Then, ask your followers to comment on the brand.

Ex-executive at Reckitt Benckiser said that it was okay to tell healthcare professionals that the products are scientific, and show them lab coats. However, it must be consistent with your code of conduct, and that it is true to what you’re saying, and can prove that it is through data.

Others are less skeptical of the advertisements, claiming that their increased frequency actively discourages breastfeeding.

Rebecca Four, a New York lactation consultant and mother of four said that it is rampant on Instagram. I’ve seen an increase in the number of people posting about it. It angers us. Does it frustrate us? Yes, of course.”