Selling Online

By Author: Steven Johnson
Total Articles: 494
Comment this article

It's strange to think back to the time before the electronic communication revolution. In those primitive years, advertisers relied on billboards as we drove around cities and along highways, on printed media like newspapers and magazines, with radio and television for more detailed information. It was a steady drip-feed wherever we happened to be and no matter what we were doing. Only hermits in a cave avoided brand awarenesses. Today, even hermits are under threat if they carry a cellphone or one of these 3G mobile devices, although laws differ depending on where the caves are located. For example, in the less regulated countries, you'll experience direct marketing by SMS and other electronic messaging systems. As soon as you switch on the device, it's like a small avalanche of spam falls out of your inbox. Worse, in many countries, you can't opt out. Once your contact number or address is known, you become a target.

In the more civilized countries, there are some limits. So, for example, the British public was recently alerted to the launch of a new melt-in-the-mouth erectile dysfunction drug. The marketers were very ...
... careful not to mention the name of the drug. Nevertheless, the manufacturer and its marketing arm were forced into a public apology and shaming by the regulators for tweeting to promote a prescription drug. So what would happen in the US if one of the pharmaceutical companies tweeted an ad about its drugs? The answer is both good news and bad news depending on your point of view. The bad news for us is that it's legal in the US to use Twitter to promote a drug. That means we can be bombarded with a range of messages reminding us of the drug. But, from the point of view of the manufacturers, the bad news is that, if they claim anything about the drugs' "efficacy", there's a legally enforceable duty to go on to give all the usual safety and risk information. Assuming you watch television, that's why all drug ads have 10 seconds of saying how wonderful the effects and then 30 seconds of rapidly scrolling information telling us what the unwanted side effects are.

So if you now think about those google ads that pop-up on the edges of our browser screens, or those messages we love to receive on our Facebook and other networking sites, all of them are too short to make efficacy claims. That sounds like the end of it except any "friend" can write on the sites. This is a major headache because any or all these unapproved comments may make efficacy claims that would likely violate the rules. Facebook has a rule that, if any drug company has a page, it must open the comments section and interact with its users. Everyone is now waiting for the FDA to produce some rules on the use of all the new digital media. There's no sign of it emerging anytime soon. So whenever you see Viagra ads, spend a moment looking at how it sells to you. As a final note, Pfizer itself failed to register the @Pfizer handle for Twitter so, if you do get odd tweets about Viagra, they may not be from the manufacturer. Pfizer is not the most up-to-date company.