Well, they sell powdered baby milk to countries where the water is too foul to make powdered baby milk safe to drink, they are unethical traders, practically slave traders and they have ruined the nation's favourite chocolate bars.
What's the point of all that third world misery if we can't even enjoy a decent bar of chocolate? (That was a flippant and cynical remark by the way).
In the Philippines, Nestle hire graduate nurses as 'health educators' to visit mothers in their own homes and try to convince them to use their products.
Also Nestle market tea to be fed to babies from 2 weeks old, despite WHO recommendations that complimentary foods should not be introduced until 6 months old.
If you look hard enough i think it is possible to find "unethical behaviour" in every company's marketing manual...
I'm sure it is, it's just that some are more guilty than others.
I don't think I'll live that long!
Well I like Ken and think he's done a great deal of good for London but other members don't agree. It's just that I hate Nestle as much as they hate Ken and I'm trying to make a point - they can't see anything good in Ken and I can't see anything good in Nestle.
I think it is probably more sensible and appropriate to treat each thread individually. I know Oldspice hates Nestle. I don't care that Oldspice hates Nestle. It has nothing to do with my view on Livingstone.
My comment was part of the conversation, that is all. Not some sort of misguided political jibe - as it seems to have been taken...
Very strange.
No, I have not taken anything as a jibe. I did not even RESPOND to your thread about Ken. I am just making the point, I don't
You responded to my post, quite rightly saying that if you look close enough you can see unethical practices in many companies. They seems to be a mild endorsement of Nestle. I am saying - look for the good in Ken, if you look hard enough it is there.
Wasn't he too just misunderstood like Ken?
He could help himself by apologising when he is quite clearly wrong though (Ken, I mean).