The infant feeding methods promoted by South African Instagram influencers in relation to crying and sleeping, 2018-2020: a retrospective digital ethnography.

BACKGROUND: Globally, there has been a decline in breastfeeding rates. This has resulted in increased infant mortality due to infectious diseases and inappropriate feeding practices. The aggressive marketing of breastmilk substitutes (BMS) by manufacturers has contributed, in part, to these declines. With the progressive use of social media, marketing has shifted from traditional methods to the use of influencers, who command a huge following on their social media accounts and influence the daily decisions of their followers. This study investigates the infant feeding methods and associated products promoted by South African influencers in relation to crying and sleeping and their followers' responses. METHODS: This was a retrospective study, which used a mixed methods digital ethnographic approach to analyse posts related to infant feeding methods that were made by seven South African Instagram influencers between the period of January 2018 to December 2020. Framing analysis was used to analyse qualitative data and quantitative data were analysed descriptively. RESULTS: From the 62 posts that were analysed, 27 were sponsored advertisements (some violating local regulations) and 35 posts promoted breastfeeding. The 18,333 follower comments and 918,299 likes in response to the posts were also analysed. We found that influencers presented BMS products as a solution for a child who cries a lot and has trouble sleeping. BMS were framed as helpful for children who are seemingly always hungry and dissatisfied with breastmilk alone. The study also found that some influencers promoted breastfeeding on their Instagram pages. Unlike BMS posts, breastfeeding posts were not sponsored. With a few exceptions, followers tended to support and reinforce the framing of influencers. CONCLUSION: Stiffer regulations should be enforced against companies using influencers to promote infant formula and other BMS products, with proactive monitoring of social media. Professionals giving advice contrary to the guidelines from the WHO should be reported according to Regulation 991 and made accountable. Proactive engagement with Instagram influencers to promote breastfeeding should be considered.

(Non)Marketing of Breastmilk Substitutes in South African Parenting Magazines: How Marketing Regulations May Be Working.

Although exclusive breastfeeding (EBF) for the first six months is optimal for child health, it remains low globally. Breastmilk substitutes (BMS) marketing undermines breastfeeding. In 2012, South Africa introduced Regulation 991, which prohibits marketing BMS products for infants below 6 months. Our study aimed to explore if and how BMS products were presented in South African parenting magazines post-R991. We applied a mixed-methods cross-sectional content analysis design, analyzing all 2018 issues of two popular parenting magazines. We descriptively analyzed quantitative codes, derived from an a priori framework, and conducted qualitative content analysis on a subset of texts and images. We found there was no overt marketing of BMS to parents with infants below 6 months. However, BMS advertisements were placed next to articles about young infants, and vague wording and images were ways by which BMS companies may indirectly benefit. Medical experts in both magazines promoted the introduction of solids before six months. To conclude, while BMS companies in South Africa were abiding by R991 by not overtly advertising BMS in parental print media, their influence persists. Continued monitoring of print media as well as other channels is advisable. This study may be of interest to countries considering stronger regulations of BMS advertising.