Consumers Want, Expect Pharma To Participate in Social Media
by Jennifer Haug, Associate Editor, DTC Perspectives
One of the questions posed by the FDA in preparations for these hearings was, For what online communications are manufacturers accountable? Chief healthcare office at Rapp, Robert Grammatica said that the question should really be, To whom are they accountable? “The only answer to that would be the patient,” he responded. “We truly believe when the patient's interests are at the forefront, everyone wins.”
The social media efforts that are truly successful are those that “provide real value to patients,” Grammatica said. Those that are “fully transparent and authentic, and have a purpose beyond selling a product” are the ones that provide a value exchange with communities and personal networks. This creates a sense of trust with consumers, as well as providing them with needed information. Those that try “to sell products overtly, superficially or by applying any interruptive one-way DTC advertising techniques in social media space,” are shut out by consumers. Or worse, efforts that “could remotely be construed as disingenuous marketing would be met with instantaneous judgment,” he pointed out.
Using a proprietary digital anthropology tool and a 300 patient online survey, Rapp researched to understand what consumers expect and whom they hold accountable for the kind of communications in social media to determine if there are different considerations that should be weighed depending on the specific social media platform that's used or based on intended audience, as per one of the FDA's questions for the hearings.
The results indicate that consumers do view the various media platforms, and therefore accountability, differently. They believe that a pharmaceutical company should be held accountable for anything that they paid for or any branded efforts they make since they are the originators. Conversely, 86% of respondents do not “expect marketers to be accountable for or address other individual's comments on non-company owned sites. However, 55% said that manufacturers are accountable for reviewing and blocking inaccurate statements from making their way to members of patient communities on their own sites,” Grammatica said.
While consumers do not expect marketers to police the Internet, 59% of respondents said that the manufacturer is responsible for correcting inaccurate information on open forums. “There is an emotional issue there around consumers expecting a much greater degree of accountability among manufacturers and regulated companies,” he explained. Most respondents, 88%, thought it would be helpful for a representation from a pharmaceutical company to comment with factual information; but in the interest of transparency, 82% expected fill disclosure from participants if they are paid or compensated representatives in any way.
Grammatica pointed out that this places marketers in a very difficult position – there is a high degree of repercussions if you break a consumer's trust and many expect pharma to weigh in on potential inaccuracies, but yet pharma is unsure about what they are and aren't allowed to say due to the current lack of guidelines.
- “Marketers, patients and caregivers alike are missing out on an important dialogue to be having on an important topic,” he added. “Many responsible marketers are sitting idly by while user-generated misinformation spreads. It spreads very rapidly, and instead of stepping in to correct, educate and update as we know consumers want [marketers] to do, no action is taken for fear of punishment. Inaccurate information continues to circulate. Lastly, I would just say that we would all be well to acknowledge that the absence of many healthcare companies and marketers in social media is ultimately a detriment to patients and the public health. By waiting for permission to participate in social media, we are only compounding the problem instead of solving it.”