Although there are many barriers to overcome, a number of pharmaceutical companies are eager to use blogs, podcasts, and other tools to market their products and advance their agendas. Following is a framework pharma marketers can use to help them:

• understand what is being said about their products online;

• ethically engage stakeholders via blogs, podcasts, and other forms of social media;

• flexibly participate in and respond to Internet conversation;

• boost their return on investment.

The Real Deal

According to a study conducted by Envision Solutions, 5 percent of U.S. Internet users looking for information about the antidepressant Lexapro visited the popular blog crazymeds.org/ between mid-December 2006 and mid-January 2007. They are relying on this Weblog because it provides straight talk about the safety and efficacy of many commonly used psychiatric medications.

There is a lesson to be learned here. People turn to social media because they are looking for relevant content. Though pharmaceutical companies devote significant resources to "product.com/" Web sites, Internet users are far from satisfied. This is because they want "the real deal" about how medications will affect them and their families. The key to engaging them, building brand loyalty, and increasing compliance is listening to what people want and providing them with information they need.

In addition to serving as an outlet for venting or sharing personal experiences, blogs are also becoming important information sources. For example, my firm will soon publish the results of a study it conducted using data from Hitwise, a leading online competitive intelligence service. As it turns out, lots of people are looking for information online about Lexapro (escitalopram oxalate), a treatment for depression and anxiety. From mid-December 2006 to mid-January 2007, 5% of all traffic from individuals typing "Lexapro" into search engines like Yahoo! and Google went to CrazyMeds.org. This is a popular blog that provides information on the safety, efficacy, and side effects of psychiatric medications. This statistic indicates that blogs and other forms of "social media" are having a growing impact on how people are finding and consuming healthcare information.

Mr. Johnmar's company, Envision Solutions, put out a press release about the study they did.  It got picked up all over the place:

Market Watch (The hardest one to read)
Health Wisdom
Fresno California's KFSN Action News 30's website (a Stephen Colbert favorite)
Institute for the Future
Canada's Internet News
Punjab India's Only Punjab
Japan's Tobyo Blog (in Japanese)

On WebProNews the press release was barely padded as an article titled Health, Search and Social Media.

The above referenced Institute for the Future used the press release, for the most part, as a basis for an article titled trust.  Obviously they never bothered to look at this site because we're not anonymous.  I guess the future is just like now, everything is true.  I'm soaking in the irony of the title because is just goes to show you based on that one article one can't trust the Institute for the Future.

Of course I'm part of the insidious plot To Bring Down WebMD.  At least that's what they think over at MDNG, some magazine geared towards doctors.  It's published using some freaky software that can be Mac-hostile, so be warned.  Oh, they write about all sorts of other sites.   Do a Google search on a neurological medication and get back to me on when one of those sites comes up, okay?

The one thing all of the above have in common?  None links to us!  I wonder if it has anything to do with this bit:

Internet health seekers are exposed to a significant amount of user-generated media (i.e., blogs, wikis and online bulletin boards) and frequent Websites [sic] developed by government, non-profits and corporations. This indicates that some may not vet information they find online because they are relying on sources they view as credible. Envision Solutions conducted this study using data provided by Hitwise the leading online competitive intelligence service.

This research was inspired by a Pew Internet & American Life Project report indicating that "three-quarters of Internet users who look online for health advice do not consistently check the source and date of content they find."

Let's see, I publish a bibliography of the books I used for articles, links to online articles, dates the pages were last updated.  We have an entire section dedicated to the consumer knowing about the source of our information, and the information that any website might present.  I wonder if there's a standard for this type of thing?  Why, there is!  What's that HON Code certification I've got good for anyway?  I guess the Pew people stink at the vetting and due diligence themselves.  Let's see if you find something like this on one of the sites that did get links in all of the above articles.  From the Lexapro page:

In any event, I was later interviewed for a story in the 19 March 2007 edition of American Medical News. The full text of the article is available in .pdf format at Envision Solutions' site.