By: Jenny Dunn
June 3, 2025
In the exploration of brand ethics, few cases have elicited as significant a global critique as Nestlé’s infant formula marketing scandal in the 1970s. The corporation engaged in aggressive promotion of infant formula to low-income mothers in developing nations, frequently distributing complimentary samples in healthcare facilities and employing nurses—some of whom lacked legitimate medical credentials—to advocate for the product. This marketing strategy misled vulnerable consumers into the erroneous belief that formula was superior to breastfeeding, ultimately jeopardizing infant health when formula was reconstituted with contaminated water due to inadequate sanitation infrastructure (Muller, 1981; Boyd, 2012).
Impact on Consumer Perception and Brand Engagement
The ethical dilemmas central to the scandal—namely, deceptive marketing practices, the exploitation of undereducated populations, and a blatant disregard for local health paradigms—culminated in a substantial global boycott that commenced in 1977. The public perception of Nestlé transformed; the corporation was seen not merely as negligent but as an entity that prioritized profit over the health and wellbeing of infants and mothers. This widespread boycott considerably undermined the brand’s reputation and eroded consumer trust in both developed and developing markets (Boyd, 2012). Despite Nestlé’s continued market dominance across various product categories, its reputation endured a profound decline. Even decades after the incident, advocacy groups persist in monitoring and critiquing the company’s practices in Asia, Africa, and Latin America, suggesting that the ramifications of the scandal are ongoing (Barboza, 2007).
Nichols et al. (2023) assert that when brands engage in unethical practices, they encounter not only immediate repercussions but also long-lasting ramifications for brand perception. Such unethical behavior can result in diminished customer loyalty and a significant erosion of brand equity. Rebuilding trust, once it has been compromised, presents a substantial challenge, particularly when the unethical actions are associated with highly sensitive areas such as infant care.
What Nestlé Should Have Done Differently
To address or alleviate this crisis, Nestlé ought to have implemented several crucial practices. Firstly, the company could have initiated culturally sensitive educational campaigns regarding infant nutrition, rather than merely positioning formula as the default solution. Such campaigns should have provided guidance on safe formula preparation while also underscoring the advantages of breastfeeding when feasible.
Secondly, it was imperative for Nestlé to align its internal culture with its external values. As Batesole (2016) articulates, internal brand culture is paramount for sustaining ethical consistency; it is essential that employees and decision-makers embody the values they profess to support.
Thirdly, it is recommended that Nestlé engage third-party oversight to conduct audits of its marketing practices and ensure compliance with evolving international guidelines, such as the WHO’s International Code of Marketing of Breast-milk Substitutes (World Health Organization, 1981). Enhanced transparency and accountability through independent audits and systematic public reporting could facilitate the restoration of consumer trust in the company. As articulated by Wheeler and Meyerson (2024), the coherence of brand behavior across both internal policies and external engagements is critical for the maintenance of brand identity and consumer loyalty.
411 Takeaways
The scandal involving Nestlé’s infant formula exemplifies the ramifications of unethical marketing practices. By employing misleading strategies against vulnerable consumers and neglecting its social responsibilities, Nestlé incited a global backlash that continues to affect its brand equity in the present day. The notion of ethical branding extends beyond mere adherence to corporate codes; it necessitates authentic and transparent engagement with all stakeholders involved. In the contemporary consumer-driven economy, brands are compelled to proactively align their internal culture, external communications, and ethical conduct to maintain trust and customer loyalty.
References
Barboza, D. (2007, May 5). How Nestlé finds ways to sell bottled water in poor countries. The New York Times. https://www.nytimes.com/2007/05/05/business/worldbusiness/05water.html
Batesole, B. (2016). Advanced branding: Internal brand culture. LinkedIn Learning.
Boyd, D. (2012). The Nestlé boycott: A story of ethical dilemma and social activism. Journal of Consumer Ethics, 1(1), 34–45.
Muller, M. (1981). The baby killer: A war on want investigation into the promotion and sale of powdered baby milks in the Third World. War on Want. https://www.babymilkaction.org/archives/421
Nichols, B. S., Kirchoff, J. F., Confente, I., & Stolze, H. (2023). When brands behave badly: Signaling and spillover effects of unethical behavior in the context of triple bottom line sustainability. Journal of Product & Brand Management. Complementary Index.
Wheeler, A., & Meyerson, R. (2024). Designing brand identity (6th ed.). Wiley Professional Development (P&T). https://bookshelf.vitalsource.com/books/9781119984825
World Health Organization. (1981). International code of marketing of breast-milk substitutes. https://www.who.int/publications/i/item/9241541601
Leave a comment