Monday, November 13, 2006

Influencing the Dialogue: Marketers Suck at It!

My post to this Blog back in July, 2006 entitled "Rozerem Ads Dis Lincoln, Show Beaver" has generated the most comment and is top-rated on Google searches for "rozerem ad" or "rozerem commercial."

Interestingly, the Rozerem marketers or their "buzz" agency lackeys -- maybe even the folks at Abelson-Taylor, the lead Rozerem ad agency -- are attempting to hijack the conversation by submitting commercial messages (ie, ads) disguised as genuine comments from ordinary citizens. One example is the following anonymous comment:
"I found this page because I googled 'rozerem commercial' to find more information about the ad because I find it to be compelling and curious. I am just your average 44 year old woman and I can't get this ad out of my mind. The imagery is intriguing and each time I see the advertisement I try to catch things I may have missed before: the beaver is eating eggs and sausage, so it must be a morning after insomnia. The beaver's speaking voice is particularly attention getting and I don't see it as a sexual image. I think the ad is funny, thought provoking, and cute and represents the random nature of our dreams. The advertisement has worked for me..I take Ambien and have been considering switching to rozerem. I guess that says it all."
I don't for a minute believe this is a genuine comment from an "average 44 year old woman," do you?


Is this a genuine comment from a consumer?
Yes No

I have mentioned before that when marketers try to influence consumer or user generated content (UGC) on blogs and on bulletin boards they really, really suck at it (see, for example, "Question Everything").

Here's how I know the above comment is fake:
  • What self-respecting, average 44 year old woman would bother searching Google for "rozerem commercial"? Only a self-absorbed ad agency guy who was involved with creating the commercial would ever do that!
  • "compeling and curious" are two buzz words that a "creative" ad agency would use. Other ad agency buzz words used here include "imagery", "intriguing", "attention getting", and thought provoking". An ad agency measures its success by how "compelling" and "thought provoking" its ads are, not by how much product it sells. In the case of Rozerem, sales are definitely not compelling (see "Rozerem Ads Innovatively Ineffectual").
  • Finally, the last sentence was the dead giveaway -- the call to action! It's what every ad should include. Obviously, it's just a bit of wishful thinking in this case.
In other words, this is an ad disguised as a genuine comment!

The Rozerem marketing folks have done a poor "impact vs. risk" analysis of this doomed attempt to slip in an ad as a genuine UGC comment. First, the impact on sales of Rozerem is pretty minimal, especially when the effort is wasted on submitting comments to this blog. Second, the risk is high because the marketer is not in control of this channel, I am! Did you guys think I would just roll over and allow the comment through? But it was even more risky because now I am "outing" you and exposing you to ridicule. All of which could have been avoided if you were just honest with me and my readers!

Pharma Marketing Blog perhaps is not as democratic as are some patient blogs or online discussion boards. Maybe many of these are not moderated and allow all comments through. Yet, my experience with such UGC venues -- I used to host a diabetes online discussion board -- is that they are much less forgiving than I of attempts to hijack their discussions by marketers or shills of marketers.

I suggest, therefore, that marketers engage in honest dialogue with consumers if they are going to insert themselves into the conversation. Here are a few simple rules:
  1. Identify yourself. Don't try to hide behind anonymity. It doesn't work.
  2. Acknowledge your true motive, which is to help sell more of product you believe in. You do believe in it, don't you?
  3. Encourage dialogue. You might learn something you can use. Just think of it as a free focus group.
  4. If things go wrong, don't argue. Change course or retreat to fight another day.
In other words, be transparent!

Unfortunately, this can never happen in the real world where pharmaceutical marketers engage outside agencies to do their bidding. The agency cannot be transparent; it's contrary to their very nature. Also, too much money and too many careers are at stake.

10 comments:

  1. This is a sock puppet comment if I have ever seen one. The truth is that the ads are terrible and there is no way someone would write this type of comment.

    ReplyDelete
  2. Anonymous12:44 PM

    As someone who works in pharme marketing, I can tell you that the marketers WANT to be transparent. I have been pitching blogs and user generated content for months and ALWAYS get shut down by the pharma co's legal department.

    As a side note, you spend alot of time focusing on the Rozerem ad which, industry wide, is considered bad. Holding that up as a reason why marketers are bad at influencing the dialog is a gross generalization. I know you need to sell magazines and get eyes on your blog, but you're beating a dead horse a bit, no?

    ReplyDelete
  3. Anonymous12:45 PM

    And speaking of transparency, why can people post comments without you approving them? Glass houses anyone?

    ReplyDelete
  4. True, the comment reads much like a target audience persona an agency might create to shape messaging. However, unless there's *proof* that this was a plant, I think it's rash to make accusations, especially with such vitriol.

    ReplyDelete
  5. That's a high hurdle you set. This is no court of law -- it's social networking!

    If it looks like a duck, walks like a duck, and quacks like a duck, then it must be a duck!

    ReplyDelete
  6. Regarding transparency and moderation...

    First of all, this is my world and it's not a democracy. Everyone is welcome to play by my rules or not as they see fit.

    Secondly, do you know how many truly vitiolic slanders have been made against drug companies in comments that I blocked? Also, how about online pharmacies hawking their wares -- which I've also seen.

    I don't want that crap here!

    ReplyDelete
  7. Regarding beating a dead horse...

    Perhaps you are right about the Rozerem ad -- it may be time to bury that horse. But in this post I wasn't beating THAT dead horse. Here I am talking about the botched attempt at influencing the conversation, wich is a completely NEW horse to beat!

    ReplyDelete
  8. Kevin3:32 PM

    Well spotted John!!
    Not only did you see it coming so to speak, it looks like 'Anon' could be the ad Agency person and is back trying to defend him/her self!! I can't see that there is much by way of vitriol in your original comment, so maybe Lisa is in on the act as well.

    ReplyDelete
  9. Anonymous2:44 PM

    well, as a 50 some woman I feel offended that you think we may work for this company. I know who abe is as far as the actor. But I want to know the voice of the beaver, he sounds familiar, kinda like jason Alexander but not quite. I cannot find out who he is...kinda like who were the singers in the Archies?

    ReplyDelete
  10. Anonymous11:37 PM

    I'm pretty sure the beaver voice is done by Ron Jeremy. Anybody out there want to confirm that?

    ReplyDelete