Does DTC Creative Mislead?
I was intrigued by a comment Novartis CEO Dan Vasella made in an interview with the Wall Street Journal Online Blog June 4. In a discussion on why the drug industry is being hammered lately by Congress, Vasella said one of the reasons was that DTC may set unrealistic consumer expectations for drugs. The Journal reported that Vasella said the drug industry does not “show advertisements where drugs are being portrayed as serious, potentially dangerous interventions. “ He went on to say “it’s all with the people happy and healthy and hugging each other and it’s the sun and the flowers.”
Neither of the recent ads attacked by Congress was for that type of ad. Lipitor was attacked because of the credentials of Jarvik. The ad is rather sober and has no fun elements. Vytorin was attacked because of clinical efficacy versus statins, not because the ad was upbeat. In fact most recent DTC ads have dropped the fun in the sun style. Ads for serious conditions have been predominantly sober and factual. While OTC-like antihistamine ads have featured flapping bees and other sun and flowers type creative, ads for most categories have portrayed drugs as serious, potentially dangerous interventions.
Crestor shows a plaque filled artery as the key element. Lunesta shows a woman resting comfortably. Evista shows ladies listening to a sober pitch on benefits and risks. I guess you can say erectile dysfunction ads still use the fun and sun style with Cialis outdoor tubs and Viagra singers. Most DTC brands, however, that treat depression, diabetes, cholesterol, blood pressure, cancer, and other diseases are subdued and sober. In fact Celebrex is an example of an ad so focused on risks that it dominates the message.
Congressional attacks on the drug industry may point to DTC as a symptom of aggressive marketing. They see marketing by detail representatives, however, as a much more problematic area given the lack of transparency and higher spending versus DTC. They see high prices in the United States as a problem. They see price fixing and safety lapses as problems. Vasella may be absolutely right that DTC is a contributor to Congressional ire, but stopping DTC would do nothing to alleviate the bad image of the drug industry with Congress or both presumptive Presidential nominees.
Drug company critics will not like DTC no matter how the creative is portrayed. Critics feel it leads to inappropriate prescribing whether creative is fun in the sun or single presenters in a studio. Congress feels it raises use of expensive branded drugs that they reimburse. The only DTC acceptable to critics is disease education. While I understand CEO Vasella’s potential concern, I think that drug companies have largely heeded it about 2 years ago, when the DTC code was introduced.
It is certainly all right for a drug CEO to be critical of DTC ads, but in this case his comments may be used to call for restrictive regulations. I doubt that was his intent, but it is news when a drug CEO implies drug ads create over expectations. It will be interesting if Dr. Vasella gets called to testify in future Congressional hearings with Mr. Dingell and Mr. Shupak.
June 9th, 2008 at 4:22 pm
[…] Bob Ehrlich at DTC in Perspective asks does DTC creative mislead? […]
June 11th, 2008 at 11:24 am
In dealing with DTC planning society wants more education on these products and less hype. Public opinion has shown that people are already apprehensive to trust pharma companies and the more “fluff” you put into these ads the more distrust you build.