J&J, Debbie Phelps, You, Me, Facebook: Is This Social Networking?

NOTE: Please read the comments to this post from Rob at JNJ Healthcare.

A lot of brouhaha is being made about pharmaceutical companies opening channels, pages, and groups on YouTube and Facebook.

Huge multi-national companies with huge promotional budgets like Johnson & Johnson (JNJ) -- number 8 in Advertising Age's list of the TOP 100 US advertisers in terms of measured media spend (see "Marketing Mix of Leading Pharma Advertisers") -- pay exactly the same fee to set up channels, groups, and applications on these social networks as do you and I.

But... and this is a BIG BUT... JNJ has the money to pay for programming, promotion, and celebrity spokespeople. You and I... not so much.

JNJ, for example, pays absolutely NOTHING to set up Facebook "groups" (eg, ADHD Moms, sponsored by McNeil Pediatrics, a JNJ company) and "applications" (eg, Accuminder) and YouTube channels (eg, JNJ's Health Channel).

JNJ's Youtube videos are of the highest quality and, like JNJ's broadcast TV ads, the Youtube videos are without doubt produced by their ad agencies. Do you have an ad agency?

Small point, but if everyone used an ad agency to develop content for social networking sites, we could no longer call content on these sites "user-generated."

BTW, I like the JNJ videos highlighting JNJ employees who also participated in the Olympic Games -- nice to see real, lower echelon employees of pharmaceutical companies and hear about their interests and motivations!

What About Dialog and Sharing Comments?
Part of social networking is the ability of ordinary people like you and me -- JNJ customers -- to add comments to social networks set up by others. Usually when pharmaceutical companies host a social network channel, they turn off the comments for obvious and understandable reasons.

Social networking etiquette, however, requires transparency and drug companies should be upfront about their comment policies on sites.

JNJ's YouTube channel seems to accept comments about their videos, but when I submitted the comment "Nice video!," it somehow "got lost in the tubosphere" and never made it on to the site. I did receive a message apologizing for that from JNJHealth. Kudos to them for that! But I don't see JNJ's comment policy on the site. I responded to JNJ's message and asked them about it, but have not yet heard back from them.

I suspect, however, that my "glitch" was the rule rather than the exception: although some of JNJ's videos have been viewed over 11,000 times, there are NO published comments whatsoever. To use an analogy with Seinfeld's "car reservation skit," JNJ takes comments, but doesn't seem to know how to hold and publish comments, which is the whole point of social networking.


McNeil's Facebook ADHD Moms Group allows you to become a "fan" but that's about it. In all other respects it looks and acts just like any Web 1.0 site!

My "Pharma Marketing News Fans" Facebook group, however, includes a discussion board and "The Wall" where anybody can post messages. You can also be a fan! (I haven't done much with this yet -- I am still learning.)

Celebrity Social Networking
Debbie Phelps -- Olympic Gold Medal winner Michael Phelps' mom -- is a Leader of ADHD Moms and she is a paid spokesperson for McNeil Pediatrics -- a fact that is revealed in her bio. She contributes to a "Monthly Feature" column and this month her piece is entitled "Back to School: Help Your Child with ADHD Succeed In and Out of the Classroom."

I really like and admire Debbie Phelps and her son -- they are REAL people and my son looks enough like Michael that I am sure he would be confused with Michael if he were to walk through Tiananmen Square. But I digress...

Debbie Phelps works as a school principal in what appears to be an inner city Baltimore middle school. On top of all that, she had to deal with Michael's ADHD, which is treatable but incurable -- you have it all your life and you have to learn to deal with it. McNeil's ADHD drug Concerta is one way to deal with it.

But Debbie doesn't talk about Concerta in her piece cited above. She does, however, mention "behavioral modifications combined with medication" several times. Also, I am sure the piece was ghost written, a fact not mentioned -- which is another breach of social networking guidelines.

I asked Debbie to be my friend on Facebook, but so far, I have not heard back from her -- perhaps another communication lost in translating social networking to pharma-style social networking (see "Social Marketing Pharma Style").

Ghost-written content, one-way communications, paid spokespeople, professional production, etc., etc. Seems that pharmaceutical marketers are shoving social networks into the same one-way communications box as all other channels they use for marketing purposes.

P.S. Here's what Marc Monseau, JNJ Corporate Communications Director and blogger over at JNJ BTW, had to say about the ADHD Moms Facebook page:

"Now to be fair, this Facebook page, ADHD Moms, still isn’t all that interactive. Though visitors can download podcasts, articles and participate in instant polls, they can’t post comments to the wall on the page. What they can do, though, is use their own Facebook pages to connect with other ADHD Moms fans. It’s a baby step, to be sure, but I understand the team is looking at other steps they can take to make it easier for people to share their insights into caring for kids with ADHD."

Merck's Sales Training "Boner"

Ed Silverman, please stop all the great posts! Go back on vacation...I have to get some work done!

Ed has posted a series of Merck sales training videos over at Pharmalot (see "The Vioxx ‘V’ Squad: Reps From Another Universe"). The videos were revealed in documents related to the Vioxx trials.

This brings me back to my days as a developer of video and computer-based sales training programs. But that's another story.

Not only are these videos hilarious, their release to the public is a real "boner," meaning "a spectacularly bad or embarrassing mistake," which is the second definition of the term found on Wikipedia.

But I'd like to point out a different kind of "boner" I found by pausing the first video at just the correct spot. See the image below.

Click on image/boner to enlarge for better viewing!

Don't know what schwing is? Enjoy this:

Are You Passionate About Obama or McCain or Neither?

Recently, the WSJ Health Blog posted results from a survey that concluded if Obama wins the election, he should work to stabilize the economy before pushing to overhaul health insurance or create cap-and-trade system for greenhouse gas emissions.

That's OK as far as it goes, but I'm more interested in which presidential candidate -- John McCain or Barack Obama -- is better for the pharmaceutical industry and why. Specifically, I seek the opinions of people who work within or for the industry.

I don't want to debate the issues here, so I set up a special 2008 Presidential Election News & Views discussion board on Pharma Marketing Network Forums where we can anonymously debate the pros and cons of Barack Obama vs. John McCain.

I invite you to express your opinions about the candidates and debate the issues in this forum.

You are also invited to take the short, online survey "Who's Better for Pharma: Obama or McCain?" to answer the questions "Who do you plan to vote for in the 2008 Presidential election?" and "Why?"

Your comments are confidential (anonymous) unless you specifically provide your contact information at the end of the survey and allow me to attribute comments to you personally.

The Cymbalta Buzz Machine is at Full Throttle!

You got to hand it to the Lilly PR people and their minions for creating tremendous buzz about Cymbalta and back pain. Here are a few sample headlines:

* "Cymbalta Found To Reduce Chronic Lower Back Pain"
* "Patients Taking Cymbalta Experienced Reduced Chronic Low Back Pain in New Study"
* "Anti-depressant drug shown to help people with low back pain"

The buzz even confused veteran reporter/blogger Jim Edwards into thinking that Cymbalta had just been approved by the FDA for back pain! Jim's article on BNET ("What Lilly Learned From Steak n Shake: A Q&A on Cymbalta") originally started with this statement:

"Eli Lilly’s Cymbalta is fast adding indications. Today the company announced it was approved for back pain and last week it was approved in Europe for generalized anxiety disorder." [My emphasis.]

Jim has since changed this to read: "Eli Lilly’s Cymbalta is fast adding indications. Today the company announced the results of a trial to see if the drug can be used for back pain and last week it was approved in Europe for generalized anxiety disorder." The Google Blog search results, however, still contain the original wording:

Click on the image to enlarge and read.

I pointed out this error to Jim in a comment to his BNET post, but he neglected to publish it and acknowledge his error. [PLEASE READ JIM'S RESPONSE IN HIS COMMENT TO THIS POST.]

My point is that even veteran reporters can be fooled by the spin put on these kinds of studies.

Keep in mind that the back pain study involved ONLY 236 patients, which is hardly a basis for making any kind of statistically-significant conclusions -- something else I pointed out in my unpublished comment to Jim's original article.

Not only that, the study was performed by a Lilly scientist and the data released at an obscure medical conference in Spain.

Sounds similar to a "seeding study" to me! That is, a study of dubious scientific merit whose purpose is to entice physicians to prescribe Cymbalta off-label (ie, to treat an indication not approved by the FDA or any other regulatory authority).

I pointed out previously that some Cymbalta direct-to-consumer (DTC) TV ads seemed to be promoting Cymbalta for pain beyond the limited "diabetic nerve pain" that it is officially approved for (see "eGAD! How I Learned to Stop Worrying and Love Cymbalta!").

As reported on the Furious Seasons blog: "...last year one academic paper found Lilly's claims of pain reduction in depression via Cymbalta treatment to be overstated and quite small in reality--an 11.5 percent effect size across several trials" (see "Lilly-Led Research Says Weak-Performing Cymbalta Good For Back Pain").

Some more relevant comments from Furious Seasons:

"But the FDA has already approved the drug for use in treating diabetic neuropathic pain and fibromyalgia. The latter approval came only in June [2007]. It's clear that Lilly very much wants to have the drug approved for at least one more pain indication so it can market the hell out of the drug--which is already being used off-label by pain management docs who are too scared of the DEA to treat pain with opiates and the Cymbalta results are not too grand from what patients tell me--but with a 12 percent effect size you've really got to wonder if the FDA would approve the drug because that is barely beating placebo in the real world. And, then, there are the drug's well known side effects--suicidality, nausea, fatigue, and withdrawal problems. One hopes that the FDA takes that sort of thing into consideration.

"And if this new study is part of Lilly's application for chronic pain (and I bet it is), then I'd really like to see Lilly put Cymbalta up against medical marijuana, which is approved for chronic pain treatment (and reportedly works pretty well) in several states. Bet the feds never let that trial happen."

It seems that us bloggers are less prone to the hype than are veteran reporters! Yet the drug industry vilifies the press as being anti-pharma! Go figure. I mean, how much more could the press be under the influence of drug industry spin? Perhaps the industry covets no less than complete ownership of the press.

I'll end this post on that note.

Introducing the Politically Incorrect AmbienCR Rooster

Have you seen the latest broadcast TV ads for AmbienCR with the rooster and tag line: "silence your inner rooster"?

Tonight, I saw the Sanofi-Aventis "Rooster Car Alarm Commercial," one of several in a series of "unbranded" ads. These ads do not mention the brand, but promote the branded web site SilenceYourRooster.com. The image at the left is taken from this decidedly web noir site.

Thus begins another sleep aid campaign utilizing some kind of creature "spokesperson." The AmbienCR rooster joins the Lunesta moth and the Rozerem beaver. The latter may have been retired by Rozerem -- I haven't seen a Rozerem ad in months. And the moth is no longer featured prominently in the Lunesta ads (see "New Lunesta Print Ad: 70% LESS Moth!").

The campaign began with a bit of expensive buzz marketing with short TV ads that just showed the Web site URL with a voice offer reciting the tag line.

Sanofi-Aventis is also engaging in some inexpensive buzz marketing by uploading 6 different versions of these 15-second "rooster" commercials on its YouTube channel. [Whoops! I guess free buzz was not cheap enough -- those clips on YouTube are no longer available I am told by Chris Truelove. Have no fear, you may still be able to find them here.]

There, you can see: Rooster Drum Set Commercial, Rooster Basketball Commercial, Rooster Hair Dryer Commercial, Rooster Car Alarm Commercial, Rooster Vacuum Commercial, Rooster Pay Phone Commercial.

My favorite is the basketball rooster.

Which Rooster Ad Do You Like Best/Dislike Least?
	Drummer
	BasketBall
	Pay Phone
	Hair Dryer
	Vacuum Cleaner
	Car Alarm

Politically Incorrect?
Each ad is gender-specific (except for the rooster, which I presume is always a cock): the sports (basketball), car and drummer roosters awaken male sleepers, whereas the vacuum cleaner, hair dryer, and phone roosters awaken female sleepers. The idea is that worry about our daily activities keeps us awake at night. Showing men worried about sports, cars, and creative outlets and women worried about vacuum cleaners and hair dryers is a bit politically incorrect, wouldn't you say?

[Here's a contest: Come up with your own version of a politically incorrect AmbienCR rooster ad and submit it as a comment to this post. In fact, this would be a great contest for S-A to sponsor via YouTube if it really wanted to use social media marketing. What kind of rooster, for example, would keep Barack Obama or John McCain awake at night? Or other celebrities like Michael Phelps. Using celebrities in the rooster ads -- another great idea for S-A!]

The pay phone rooster sketch doesn't quite fit into this theme. Who worries about getting anonymous phone calls? Perhaps this is a subtle statement about women as victims? I could be reading too much into this, but that's why DTC (direct-to-consumer) advertising is so interesting -- it's a great pasttime for us amateur psychoanalysts.

I do not know if ALL of these 15-second unbranded ads have actually been aired on network TV yet (maybe a different one will be aired each night this week). All of them were uploaded to YouTube a mere 3 days ago.