Comments on: How Marketing with Meaning Can Save Pharma — Part 1 http://www.doseofdigital.com/2009/10/marketing-meaning-save-pharma-part-1/ A Healthy Approach to E-marketing -- Effectively using digital technology and social media in pharma and healthcare marketing Tue, 09 Mar 2010 17:56:22 +0000 http://wordpress.org/?v=2.9.1 hourly 1 By: More Coverage of the Book Launch – Marketing with Meaning http://www.doseofdigital.com/2009/10/marketing-meaning-save-pharma-part-1/#comment-2583 More Coverage of the Book Launch – Marketing with Meaning Wed, 07 Oct 2009 13:02:08 +0000 http://www.doseofdigital.com/?p=1610#comment-2583 [...] Jonathan Richman created a two part post about how Marketing with Meaning can save pharma.  Although Jonathan works for me, I didn’t force him to do this.  He’s a true believer and is dedicated to making a difference in the health care industry through his blog, Dose of Digital. [...] [...] Jonathan Richman created a two part post about how Marketing with Meaning can save pharma.  Although Jonathan works for me, I didn’t force him to do this.  He’s a true believer and is dedicated to making a difference in the health care industry through his blog, Dose of Digital. [...]

]]> By: Jonathan Richman http://www.doseofdigital.com/2009/10/marketing-meaning-save-pharma-part-1/#comment-2528 Jonathan Richman Mon, 05 Oct 2009 07:08:40 +0000 http://www.doseofdigital.com/?p=1610#comment-2528 Great point, Paulo. And as Sydney mentioned in the comment below, there's certainly more to this issue than one conspiracy theory and the Morton case has to do a lot with the anti-vaccine rhetoric as well. I used this example because it was a very fresh one. I agree with your point that transparency is a key issue to be sure. I almost count that as table stakes. That is, you HAVE to do that no matter what or nothing else really matters. So, assuming we do that well, I still think there's much more that needs to be done. Part of my point is that if there was more trust and the public thought that pharma companies were in it for them (which they generally are), then these anti-pharma conspiracy people would be shouted down by all the pro-pharma people. You don't see them though...at least not yet. One way this can be done is by doing what I mention in this post (and the one coming tomorrow) about creating a new type of marketing. How much more comfortable and happy would the public be if it wasn't bombarded with DTC TV ads for pharma (or any other industry for that matter)? Of course, if you eliminate that as a marketing channel, you need something to replace it. I think that's where this Marketing with Meaning concept comes in. In tomorrow's post, I'll show you a bunch of examples where this is working for many companies and in the post after that (yep, a series), I'll show you exactly how a bunch of pharma brands could do it if they wanted to. Stay tuned. Great point, Paulo. And as Sydney mentioned in the comment below, there’s certainly more to this issue than one conspiracy theory and the Morton case has to do a lot with the anti-vaccine rhetoric as well. I used this example because it was a very fresh one. I agree with your point that transparency is a key issue to be sure. I almost count that as table stakes. That is, you HAVE to do that no matter what or nothing else really matters. So, assuming we do that well, I still think there’s much more that needs to be done. Part of my point is that if there was more trust and the public thought that pharma companies were in it for them (which they generally are), then these anti-pharma conspiracy people would be shouted down by all the pro-pharma people. You don’t see them though…at least not yet.

One way this can be done is by doing what I mention in this post (and the one coming tomorrow) about creating a new type of marketing. How much more comfortable and happy would the public be if it wasn’t bombarded with DTC TV ads for pharma (or any other industry for that matter)? Of course, if you eliminate that as a marketing channel, you need something to replace it. I think that’s where this Marketing with Meaning concept comes in. In tomorrow’s post, I’ll show you a bunch of examples where this is working for many companies and in the post after that (yep, a series), I’ll show you exactly how a bunch of pharma brands could do it if they wanted to.

Stay tuned.

]]> By: Paulo Machado http://www.doseofdigital.com/2009/10/marketing-meaning-save-pharma-part-1/#comment-2525 Paulo Machado Mon, 05 Oct 2009 01:36:19 +0000 http://www.doseofdigital.com/?p=1610#comment-2525 Great post Jonathan! This is a topic that pharma, insurers, physicians and other stakeholders should address as a team. If all of the key stakeholders are able to communicate with one consistent voice to patients then their concerns of conspiracy theories will be reduced. All of the key stakeholders need to address the issue of public trust and one of the most effective ways to accomplish this is through transparency and aligned messages. Great post Jonathan! This is a topic that pharma, insurers, physicians and other stakeholders should address as a team. If all of the key stakeholders are able to communicate with one consistent voice to patients then their concerns of conspiracy theories will be reduced. All of the key stakeholders need to address the issue of public trust and one of the most effective ways to accomplish this is through transparency and aligned messages.

]]> By: Jonathan Richman http://www.doseofdigital.com/2009/10/marketing-meaning-save-pharma-part-1/#comment-2523 Jonathan Richman Sun, 04 Oct 2009 22:31:53 +0000 http://www.doseofdigital.com/?p=1610#comment-2523 Sydney, Great point. I hadn't considered the differences between these groups. Either way, and I think you'll agree, it's not a very good situation pharma companies find themselves in (whether they make vaccines or some other products). Perhaps the vaccine group is the most vocal of the anti-pharma groups and might even be considered a bellwether for what the rest of the industry might have to contend with should it continue on this same path. Sydney, Great point. I hadn’t considered the differences between these groups. Either way, and I think you’ll agree, it’s not a very good situation pharma companies find themselves in (whether they make vaccines or some other products). Perhaps the vaccine group is the most vocal of the anti-pharma groups and might even be considered a bellwether for what the rest of the industry might have to contend with should it continue on this same path.

]]> By: Sydney http://www.doseofdigital.com/2009/10/marketing-meaning-save-pharma-part-1/#comment-2521 Sydney Sun, 04 Oct 2009 21:46:40 +0000 http://www.doseofdigital.com/?p=1610#comment-2521 As usual, a provocative post. And while your point on the pharmaceutical sector's need to improve its reputation is spot on, the particular example you gave may not be the best. The outpouring on the Natalie Morton case has more to do with the power of rabid anti-vaccine activists than it does with rabid anti-pharma critics. Just look at what has happened with Gardasil in this country: http://www.bio-medicine.org/medicine-news/Texas-Lawmakers-Give-The-Boot-To-Cervical-Cancer-Vaccine-20265-1/ Absurd. I would argue that the Natalie Morton case is more about the ability of a well-organized, vocal minority to impose its will over common sense, medical fact and the well-being of young women than it is about pharma's awful reputation. The anti-vaccine movement has gone after all sorts of vaccines over the last decade. And, as a result, we now face a growing problem with diseases, like polio, that had been brought under control through a vaccination program that was one of the great triumphs of 20th century public health. I'll climb down off the soapbox now, and look forward to hearing all about Marketing with Meaning at e-Patient in Philly. As usual, a provocative post. And while your point on the pharmaceutical sector’s need to improve its reputation is spot on, the particular example you gave may not be the best.

The outpouring on the Natalie Morton case has more to do with the power of rabid anti-vaccine activists than it does with rabid anti-pharma critics. Just look at what has happened with Gardasil in this country: http://www.bio-medicine.org/medicine-news/Texas-Lawmakers-Give-The-Boot-To-Cervical-Cancer-Vaccine-20265-1/ Absurd.

I would argue that the Natalie Morton case is more about the ability of a well-organized, vocal minority to impose its will over common sense, medical fact and the well-being of young women than it is about pharma’s awful reputation. The anti-vaccine movement has gone after all sorts of vaccines over the last decade. And, as a result, we now face a growing problem with diseases, like polio, that had been brought under control through a vaccination program that was one of the great triumphs of 20th century public health.

I’ll climb down off the soapbox now, and look forward to hearing all about Marketing with Meaning at e-Patient in Philly.

]]>