The social media sites Facebook, Twitter and YouTube have clearly established themselves as game-changing components in the way 21st Century consumers get information. So why does big Pharma continue to drag its feet when it comes to making a full-on commitment to utilize these sites as a global marketing tool?

Clearly, pharmaceutical manufacturers know the social media digital universe is important. Discussions weighing the pros and cons have been in heavy rotation in online articles, chat sessions, workshops and even conferences dedicated to this very topic over the last few years. But despite ongoing collateral encouragement to take advantage of these dynamic new media channels, Pharma’s steps have been logistically awkward and creatively unremarkable.

Sure, “vanity” pages exist on Facebook for this drug or that disease state. Companies now routinely distribute their video news release footage via YouTube and to its credit, Astra Zeneca did, in fact, host a first-of-its-kind Twitter conference in February 2011. But the conference was to put it kindly, a bit of a dud. Indeed the reason could be that the subject matter, “How to Raise Awareness about Helping Patients Save Money Through Prescription Savings Programs” probably bored everyone to tears and as a result AZ only increased its Twitter followng about 1%. But with dwindling pipelines and blockbuster products going off patent every few months, can Pharma really afford to cling to outdated traditional advertising and pr channels that simply don’t have the inter-generational reach or relevance of Facebook, Twitter or YouTube?

The interconnectivity of the internet is what users expect in all quarters of our economy. The traditional doctor patient relationship has not been replaced but it has been transformed by a patient’s ability to easily source medical information on the internet. Consumers are certainly more likely to trust an anonymous Tweeter or Facebook ‘poster’ who has experience with a medication than the FDA boilerplate that comes with a pharma advertisement or the tiresome brand websites that companies continue to pump out. To allow patients to share their wisdom via open commenting on a Facebook wall, even if some of them are revealing contra-indications, really is the way to “put the patient first.” A mantra that pharmaceutical brand teams have been “claiming” they have already been doing for decades — but do they really? On August 15, 2011 Pharma Facebook pages will lose the ability to control whether or not someone posts on a wall. This new policy will definitively force Pharma’s hand which I believe is a very good shift in the dialogue.

I understand the reluctance; there are legitimate concerns, expenses, and risks associated with an Rx product engaging in social media sites – controlling the brand, monitoring the site 24 hours a day, class action lawsuits, etc. But what’s being lost in the traditional cautiousness and regulatory fog of this industry sector are the huge pluses that will benefit not just the consumer but the manufacturer.

Pharma must throw attention and money at everything that is ‘said’ to ensure they are inoculated from medical malpractice, malfeasance, and false advertising. An in-house Dr. Killjoy would have to say “this is an off-label use or unfounded claim that GlaxoSmithKline in no way endorses or encourages.” A thorough cost-benefit analysis is the functional equivalent of opening Pandora’s Box. The actual value of social media to Pharma is as unproven as Pharma’s culpability or efficacy with regards to the drug’s page. Is it worth a manufacturer’s time to respond to everybody with a Twitter account? When @janedoe tweets “I took a Xanax and it made me hook up with a stranger and now I’m pregnant.” Or some crackpot commenting, “I just took Viagra and it made me cheat on my wife.” Rogue sites exist already, like gypsy cabs on the internet. They operate like little communities harnessing the collective knowledge of patients who have personally experienced a disease. Forming proper communities that create an atmosphere of empathy, support, and connectedness really is the way forward.

As it stands, Pharma is spending BILLIONS settling lawsuits for off-label drug use promotion and sexual discrimination in the workplace cases anyway – a little remedial number-crunching might suggest that a corporate resolution or two designed to curtail these high risk and mendacious shenanigans in the interest of reallocating monies for what is already clearly the most valuable global marketing of the future might be a savvy move to bust.

Yes, the social media frontier is mercurial and still changing – just because there are red flags today doesn’t mean Pharma shouldn’t be a part of the game as it evolves, instead of waiting for it to evolve in its’ favor. Pharma needs to step up to the plate and be its own agent for real change. I say, stop relying on disgruntled consumers on one hand and an anemic regulatory agency on the other. Design the trail, shape the dialogue and develop new legal tools and regulatory policies that will fashion the rules of your own engagement.

Tags: Astra Zeneca Twitter conference, Facebook changes on commenting, FDA regulations on social media, pharmaceutical companies and social media, social media and pharmaceuticals

Posted in blog | No Comments »