Category: Uncategorized

Time for Digital Marketing Wake-up Call at FDA

As we said the other day, we are now covering the online marketing of pharmaceutical and health products. One reason is that we want policymakers to better understand and assess the unique impact of online marketing techniques on the promotion of drugs. Here’s an excerpt from a DTC Perspectives article on the impact of digital media on pharma marketing:

“In video, this means that your target audience will consume three minutes or more of your branded content, and they will do it without being “forced.” Efficiency of the media buy improves, we see brand recall and favorability metrics increase significantly, and this more educated patient is much more likely to ask for a script. In a recent control/test survey conducted by HealthiNation, brand favorability increased by 30 percent over control and intent to ask for a script for the advertised brand doubled…Accurate and true measurement – Digital means you get what you pay for. If you are purchasing media placements to 100,000 viewers who are interested in heart disease, you get exactly that. Each view is counted and reported…”

source: DTC on Demand: The New Era of Qualified Reach for Consumer Rx Advertising. Raj Amin. DTC Perspectives. March 2010.

Black Box Warning Required for Digital Rx Ads

This week CDD expanded its work on public health & digital advertising to include issues related to prescription drug advertising and health marketing online.  It submitted to the FDA, as part of that agency’s proceeding on Internet and social media marketing, comments.  We are speaking on this issue next week in New York.  And we will be dedicating resources via this blog and other venues on the issue.

But meanwhile we will begin by covering some of the latest developments.  In our FDA comments, we raise questions about the online targeting and data collection practices of online health marketers, including the tracking and targeting a consumer by their medical “condition.”  One of the companies we cited was “Everyday Health” and its “ConditionMatch(TM)” marketing system.  Today, that company posted a release saying it was the “faster-growing health network.”  Here’s an excerpt:  GHM audience is up 93% over a year ago — to 32 million unique visitors monthly — due to growth in consumers’ appetite for sophisticated, condition-specific information on niche sites. Advertisers have followed…

One factor driving the ad gains: a precise targeting capability GHM calls ConditionMatch(TM), which profiles “in-market” consumers (people searching for specific medical and wellness information). GHM delivers three primary audience channels: Consumer Medical, Consumer Wellness, and Healthcare Professionals. The Medical Channel delivers condition-specific audiences (e.g., allergy, diabetes, depression); Wellness bridges a marketplace gap by combining fitness and nutrition sites; and HCP aggregates professional website audiences.

“Pharma and CPG brands want condition specific-audiences of scale,” said Bill Jennings, CEO of Good Health Media. “Our site partners attract more a more frequent, loyal audience than broader health destinations online. We’re able to reach people who are actively seeking specific information on partner sites and across the Internet. That’s the ideal platform.”

Remembering Loni Ding: Indie Filmmaker, Community and Media Advocate, Professor, Co-founder of ITVS

Loni Ding was a remarkable person.  A highly dedicated award winning independent filmmaker, Loni made a wonderful series of films over the decades.  Her work on the Asian American experience leaves a rich legacy of creative and moving documentaries, including on the immigration of Chinese to America [“Ancestors in the Americas”] and the Japanese Americans who served in World War II [“Nisei Soldier” and “The Color of Honor”].  She also produced the pioneering public TV children’s series Bean Sprouts.  Loni played an important role in the early history of public television, including her work for “Open Studio” at San Francisco station KQED.  Loni saw the unfulfilled promise of public television to serve the public interest and the arts, and she did everything in her power to make PBS a more responsible programming service.

Loni just passed away after a long illness I was told.  One of her most important accomplishments was the work to establish the Independent Television Service (ITVS) during the 1980’s. She was one of our most important congressional witnesses, and lobbied tirelessly.  Loni always had time to help organize and convince people that public TV needed a structural change in its funding system.  The result was a unique funding organization for independent producers that has supported many important films over the years.  I know Loni was also a wonderful wife and parent of two children she loved dearly.  She was also a friend.

Loni Ding’s creative work–especially her films–and her political efforts–the ITVS and more–will help serve as a living memorial to a remarkable life.

When Privacy Groups Raise Money from Facebook, Google, and the companies they are supposed to hold accountable

Facebook’s COO Sheryl Sandberg is the industry draw for CDT’s 2010 fundraising event.  “Gold” sponsors of the “host committee” include Facebook, Google, Microsoft and AT&T.  “Silver” sponsors (and there’s a long list) include Adobe, NCTA, eBay, Verizon, Intel, AOL, Time Warner Cable, News Corp., Visa, Yahoo, Comcast and a bevy of law firms that work on privacy and related issues.  They include Manatt Phelps, Wilmer Cutler, Wilson Sonsoni, and Arnold and Porter.

It’s troubling–to say the least–when any consumer/public interest group takes funding from the industry/industries it is supposed to hold accountable.  Conflict of interest questions and concerns need to be posed whenever the group takes a position and has funding from parties connected to the issue (think about Facebook and Google’s recent privacy problems, let alone legislation and policies now before Congress and the FTC).  It’s great to have extra money.  But we suggest groups “just say no” to such special interest relationships.

Interactive Ad Bureau boasts it “Lobbied extensively and proactively against” FTC Consumer Protection Proposals

In its annual report for 2009, the Interactive Advertising Bureau [IAB] cites as a accomplishment that it “Lobbied extensively and proactively against several proposals— including the FTC Reauthorization Act—that would grant broad newn rulemaking powers to the Federal Trade Commission.“  It also notes that the “IAB PAC had an active year supporting many key Congressional champions of the interactive advertising industry and was able to host the first ever IAB fundraiser.  The PAC begins 2010 with a healthy balance of over $55,000 cash on hand.“

Those who gain access to our consumer data: “will be the new kingmakers”

As we have explained all along, the ability to collect and analyze data about us and our social networks is the “DNA” of contemporary advertising and marketing.  There is a very thoughtful piece in “Metrics Insider,“ and I hope you will look at this excerpt:

“The future of advertising is not about social, not about viral videos, not about mobile, not about any new medium or any new ad unit — but about data. Those who know what to do with this will be the new kingmakers, the new rulers of Madison Avenue — or the creators of a new Avenue of media…The critical component that makes this new world work is data — not simply general research data, but data about you. This goes far beyond just behavioral targeting, to your preferences, your interests, your actions — all of the signals you send as you move through the grand stage of life. The revelation is that this new world is no longer the far-off land on the horizon — we’ve hit the beach.”

 from:  Death Of The Impression/Rise Of The Data Economy.  Michael D. Andrews.  Mediapost.  February 18, 2010.

Buzz and all that Social Media Data `Jazz’

As we explained to reporters, the larger issue to be addressed when discussing Google’s Buzz is the  role of social media marketing and our privacy.  There’s a race to “monetize” our relationships and connections–the so-called social graph.  It wasn’t a coincidence that at the same time Google launched books it acquired social media marketing company Aardvark.    Here is an insightful excerpt from this week’s Search Insider:

” …by building its own social tools into the growing user base for Gmail, Apps and iGoogle, Google’s algorithms will be able to see what sorts of conversations, questions or responses you offer not only through email correspondence or in a collaborative exchange on Wave, but also via Aardvark and, by extension, Facebook and Twitter.  Which represents an opportunity to serve highly targeted, extremely relevant ads in ways that go well beyond the keyword search.”

Microsoft Differs from IAB Lobby on Strengthening FTC Consumer Safeguards [via a letter sent to CDD]

We asked both Microsoft and Google, which serve on the executive committee of the Interactive Ad Bureau [IAB]  trade lobbying group, whether they supported its recent letter opposing congressional action to strengthen the FTC. The letter was signed by IAB and other marketing and advertising organizations.  Microsoft has just replied.  We are glad they aren’t in lock-step with the ever so transparent–and terrified of consumer protection policy–IAB.  Here’s what they emailed me today:


Jeff,

 

Thank you for your inquiry.

 

As a company, Microsoft has not taken a position on the Consumer Protection Financial Agency bill.  As a whole, the bill is directed at other industry sectors.  Nor has Microsoft taken a position on the expansion of the Federal Trade Commission’s regulatory authority as proposed in that legislation.

 

Microsoft has supported the expansion of FTC authority, including in our longtime support for comprehensive federal privacy legislation and in a recent legislative proposal on protecting consumers related to cloud computing, where we said that the FTC should play a key role.  In the current environment, there ought to be better alternatives to guide the marketplace than de facto rulemaking through enforcement activity.

 

It is our view that there is merit to having FTC rulemaking authority mirror that of other agencies — we favor increased certainty and the ability for comment on proposed rules that will impact our industry.  At the same time, the reasons the FTC’s existing mechanisms were put in place (as articulated in the industry letter you cited) should not be ignored.  Perhaps there is room for a balanced approach.

 

We understand that the status of the financial reform bill may be uncertain, at least the status of the relevant provision in the Senate version of that legislation.

 

We are open to discussing these issues further with you and other interested stakeholders.

 

Sincerely,

Frank Torres

Director, Consumer Affairs

Facebook Expands Big Brand Marketing Clout: Helping Starbucks to “get people to buy a muffin on a certain day”

The top execs at Facebook claim that the social network giant ad targeting apparatus is well understood by its users, and that they have secured their consent.  But I suggest few users understand the complexities of Facebook’s viral marketing and tracking system, let alone the new Facebook/Nielsen “Brandlift” initiative designed to demonstrate Facebook can deliver big for the biggest brands.  According to New Media Age:
More than 70 studies have been done in the US in the FMCG, retail, media and entertainment, telecoms, financial and automotive sectors. Nielsen and Facebook said 97% of these found a significant lift in at least one brand metric, while 85% reported an increase in at least two.  “Starbucks is a heavy advertiser on Facebook,” said [Trevor Johnson, head of strategy and planning EMEA at Facebook] Johnson. “We ran a campaign to get people to buy a muffin on a certain day and measured a 94% uplift in purchase intent.”…Facebook will apply the demographic data it already collects from its users to deliver results tailored to brands’ needs.

What the new online ad industry-sponsored plan to identify Behavioral-Targeted Ads and Data Collection with the letter “i” really stands for: ineffective [And should be relabeled “ID”—Ineffective and Disingenuous]

Statement of Jeff Chester, executive director, Center for Digital Democracy, Washington, D.C. www.democraticmedia.org

A new self-regulatory scheme designed to head-off meaningful consumer privacy rules by Congress and the Federal Trade Commission is to be released today, according to several reports.  In addition, the Council of Better Business Bureaus has issued a RFP asking for technology solutions to bolster its online advertising self-regulatory approach.

These efforts are trying to place a flimsy band-aid over a gushing consumer data privacy wound.  Disclosure and more opportunities to opt-out is an online ad industry copout. Interactive marketers have created a data collection monster.  What’s needed are Fair Information Principles for the digital age, enforced by regulators, which dramatically minimize how much data is collected, stored, sold and resold–and limit how it can be used.   Instead we get fancy package relabeling fashioned by Madison Avenue.

Consumers face a bewildering, far-reaching, and complex system created by the online ad business that collects and harvests their information—including financial, health, and other personal details—that is non-transparent and unaccountable.  These new self-regulatory initiatives are disingenuous, because they don’t address the real problem:  that through a range of largely stealth online marketing techniques, digital media has been designed to ensure that consumers provide reams of their personal data.

As the FTC holds its second privacy hearing this Thursday, and as the House Commerce Committee finalizes its proposed legislation, policymakers must ask themselves:  how can we do a better job protecting consumers–instead of enabling the same kind of self-regulatory approach that helped bring our economy to the brink of disaster.  Consumers and lawmakers should especially be concerned that the approach backed by Truste and Future of Privacy Forum will permit monopolistic broadband Internet Service Providers, such as Comcast and AT&T,  to gather even more personal information on their subscribers.