Digital Influence Mapping Project

Join Us for a Post-FDA Tweetup in DC

WOMMA and Ogilvy will be presenting at the FDA "Social Media" hearings this week in Washington DC. I will be speaking on behalf of WOMMA in my role as President of the Board. Rohit Bhargava will be presenting on behalf of Ogilvy in his role spearheading our Digital Health business. We have all been waiting for some time for the FDA to engage and start evolving their guidlines to address the changes wrought by social media. The 2-day hearings is just a start. And a ton of experts will speak over those two days.

On Thursday night, November 12th,  from 6:30pm - 8:30pm, WOMMA and member companies -  Live World and Ogilvy PR -  will have a tweet up at the Ogilvy offices in DC (1111 19th Street - 10th floor). Tony DiResta who is WOMMA's legal counsle will give a post-hearing wrap-up and a lot of us who participated will be there offering our won thoughts. Mostly its social.

You can RSVP here or just show up.

WOMMA to Present at FDA Hearings on Social Media

On Friday, November 12th, Melissa Davies, Research Director at Nielsen, and I will present on behalf of WOMMA during two sessions with the FDA. These are part of the long-awaited FDA foray into considering new guardrails for health products marketers in social media. Pharma, one of a few heavily regulated industries, has stepped cautiously into social media over the past few years. Still, pharam is not as paralyzed as some would suggest. Dose of Digital maintains a great list of pharma social media activities from Twitter to communities.

WOMMA has just gone through a productive year with the FTC that culminated recently with the FTC Guidelines on Endorsements and Testimonials.We will have a follow up session with the FTC at this year's WOMMA Summit in November.

WOMMA's Role

Ultimately, WOMMA wants to protect the consumer and the trust that brands can build with consumers if they use social media well. Consumers increasingly expect brands to engage and be available in social media. Brands value third party word of mouth as one of the most trusted sources for opinion and purchase decision. Brands and consumers want to connect in socila media. And we have to do it right or the basic premise beneath WOM - trust - will crumble. We also want to empower marketers to productively engage within social media. Pharma has been held back in part because of their fear of additional regulations or actions.  

The FDA's 5 Questions

The FDA has set up a listening session on November 18 and 19. The agenda is full of marketers and each of us has a 10-minute slot to help inform the FDA's 5 questions. 

It is not clear yet if these are even the right 5 questions. Still, in respect to the FDA and the simple principle that we have to start somewhere, I am grateful that they opened their doors. You can review the FDA's Notice of Public Hearing here.

Here are the 3 questions we plan to address with a quick summary of our POV:

Question #1: For what online communications are manufacturers, packers, or distributors accountable?

In today’s social Web marketers and consumers alike are flocking to third party sites and platforms both to be where consumers are and to garner legitimate third-party mentions that corroborate their products’ benefits or around a topic related to a disease or condition. The power of word of mouth means that marketers want influencers/bloggers to experience their topic, product, or service that relates to a brand and then share about it authentically.

WOMMA has an aggressive POV on what is proper disclosure both in spirit and actuality. Aligned with the recent FTC Guidelines, we see the opportunity for marketers to not only practice ‘full disclosure’ of any and all material connection between brand and influencer/blogger, but also to strongly encourage those influencers to do their part to properly disclose. As with the FTC Guidelines, it doesn't take payment to define a material connection. Marketers are better off disclosing any type of material connection whether they be travel expenses for a health blogger, technology support on an unbranded community, or even the snacks at a tweetup. Disclose and let the consumer judge credibility. 

Question #3: What parameters should apply to the posting of corrective information on Web sites controlled by third parties?

Social media is defined by conversations and a hyper-democratized  approach to publishing. Brands and marketers want to connect more directly with customers to better understand their needs and build a stronger relationship. In addition, brands want to ensure that the full story behind products are shared outside their Web sites. They want to be where consumers are spending their time and that is increasringly across the social web.Can pharma marketers be allowed the opportunity to comment on blogs and message boards – completely transparent about their identity and interests – to help keep the information about medical products as clear as possible?  Most pharma marketers do not feel empowered to comment or "fact correct" as the historic FDA guidelines might interpret that as a new instance requiring advertiisng or labeling information. Imagine if every comment required that full page disclaimer you see in print ads.  Conversely, we must not require an unsupportable burden - the requirement to "story-correct" across the vastness of social media. Like the FTC Guidelines, the marketer must focus their energy on keeping their own communications accurate and encouraging and even enforcing accuracy from any influencers they proactively outreach to.

The challenge with health care information is to allow for this conversational interaction while always putting the full story behind products and services front and center. No blog comment field or Tweet will sustain the full content of a product Web site. We may need to allow pharma a consistent "one-click" solution where marketers can comment and link back to the full body of a product insert.  

Question #5: Specific to Adverse Events Reporting

One of the biggest effects of social media is the new opportunity for brands to hear what consumers are saying in public discussions about products, services and issues important in their lives. Smart marketers have adopted “big ears” to make sure they listen and respond to customer concerns. 

The historic and important requirements around adverse events reporting have held many health care marketers back from listening to consumers. How the intent of adverse events reporting actually applies when a patient posts a product experience in Twitter with no contact information in their “bio” or exactly when an adverse event is established over the course of several blog posts is not clear. We need to find a clearer way of recognizing an adverse event and then reporting it that does not hold back a marketer from listening to what consumers are saying in the public space.

Outcome of the Hearings
The real solution may lie in the FDA establishing clear principles and then encouraging the industry to define exact practices as we are doing at WOMMA in relation to the FTC Guidelines. Can the FDA really hope to define the exact nature of a url or how to balance their historic need to approve marketing claims with the non-stop, real-time nature of a twitter-ized social Web? Will this type of detailed regulation help or hold innovation back? We need principles that protect the consumer but do not curb marketers from innovating.

Stop by:

If you are in DC for the hearings, stop by Ogilvy on Thursday night. WOMMA, LiveWorld and Ogilvy will be hosting a post-hearing Tweetup to recap what we heard that day. RSVP Here

   

Pharma Comms Knows Social Media Will Change Them

I started the week at the Exl Pharma conference at Pfizer where I spoke and had a chance to connect with some of the top pharma communications pros. The sessions started with a poll of the room.

"Evolution of New Media"

Asked what the top global communications issue facing pharma is today, the 150 comms experts said the "evolution of new media" was number one with 27% of the room vote. Some other issues ranked high including regulatory concerns. But overall, social media was the topic of the day.

Sally Susman, SVP of Corp Comms at Pfizer, did a great job opening up the sessions. She identified two trends shaking up the business:

• Growing animosity towards corporations (42% of people trust the healthcare industry to do the right thing - drop of 16%)

• Far fewer outlets to promote our companies: 1 in 5 journalists have lost their job,100 newspapers have shut down.

So without the traditional editorial channels to "work", how can pharma rebuild reputation?

Sally identified some new opportunities:

1. New focus on the "how" vs. the "what." People respect what pharma makes just not the how. We need to stop defending the what we do and strive to change the "how." And I think she woudl support that we also need ot change the "how we communicate" about ourselves.

2. Talk about what we are for vs. against. She played a current TV spot that promotes affordable healthcare for all supported by the industry. This is quite a change from the spots launched during the Hillary Clinton healthcare push which were meant to sink the efforts at that time.

3. Communicate using real people telling their own stories. Sally seems convinced that regular people - patients, employees, you name it - are much better at telling the story than ads or even the CEO. She played a Fox segment featuring Dr. Jorge Puente from Pfizer who came up with a program to cover perscription costs for those who were laid off. He is a genuine spokesperson.
This is where the industry can rebuild trust. And it was a perfect lead-in to our discussion about social media later on.

Someone asked "...how should pharma use social media?"

Sally told the group (and I am paraphrasing), "We are trying a lot of things. We wanted to have a company blog and were very nervous about it. Now there is a vibrant debate about (some relatively trivial matter that surfaced on the blog - her point was that blogging didn't deliver the catastrophe some might have predicted)...We are twittering. Ray Kerins and others are tweeting, but we are not sure what will come from it. Facebook is blocked at Pfizer.... "Why?" Sally asks. She mentioned Bill Marriott's blog as a great example where it works.

She made a final, interesting point:  she evaluated a recent ad campaign for its "Return on Reputation" - did it actually enhance or detract from the corporate reputation? More and more communications pros have to step in to manage the impact of all marcom efforts on the reputation, especially in an industry that still feels that its reputation remains at dangerously low levels.

Create a Physician 2.0 Advisory Panel and a Patient 2.0 Advisory Panel

Health care companies (i.e. pharma and device manufacturers) are eager to learn how to use Web2.0 platforms for their business. Many are in their 4th or 5th year of experimentation with interesting digital solutions now in the form of Facebook pages, partnerships with Sermo or patient communities.

Still, companies are spread out across the social media adoption spectrum. Some remain inactive and skeptical, others just launched their latest blog.

One tactic every pharma could benefit from is establishing two advisory panels to help them stay close to the real experience of the patients and physicians they serve. This is about learning from feedback not yet activating outbound word of mouth (WOM).

Physician 2.0 Panel
Identify 10 digitally-active physicians using the Influencer Map criteria that we and many other companies use to pull influencers out of the haystack of social media. Basically this is a X,Y axis of relevance and influence.

Invite the group for an initial on-campus meetup with marketers and communication specialists. The agenda? Ask each physician to share with the group 3 digital behaviors they didn't have a year ago. Then ask them to share how they think those digital behaviors have affacted their practice and to speculate how they may affect the practice in the future.

That's the first half of their session. For the second half, hold a brainstorming session with those same physicians. Ask how they might accelerate their use of social media to enhance their buisness and the outcomes of patients. Explore how pharma might fuel that acceleration.  

Invite the group to remain connected for informal Q&A's from time to time via a private NING network. Make sure the communications team managing the relationships is trained in adverse events reporting just in case that comes up (chances are it won't).

Equip each doctor with a FlipVideo cam. Ask them to create 1 short video a quarter updating us on their use of social media. Those videos will be for internal use only yet can be spread pretty widely via an employee extranet. This is a great way to continuously get the "customer" in front of employees.

Patient 2.0 Panel
With physicians help, identify 10 digitally-active patients that meet the same criteria. Follow a similar process of inviting them to campus for an initial event. Listen to and engage with  them as you did with yoru Physicians. Stay conncected with them for at least one year.

ROI
In the short term, measure the ROI in terms of insights or ideas-generated. Okay, it's difficult to boil down to an ROI. Still, count how many things you learned. Compare it to the actionable insights from a boatload of focus groups. I don't know about you but I consider myself lucky if I end up with 3 actionable insights from groups. If you do 4 focus groups at $15K a pop, that's $60K or $20K per insight. You are going to much better with your panel. The payoff only begins with those insights. Sharing the experience of these folks with as many people as possible in the organization and building relationships with folks who may choose to be outbound word of mouth ambassadors one day will quickly eclipse that value.

Physician 2.0: A Steady Stream of Innovation

Once upon a time doctors and lawyers were portrayed as the digital Luddites of society. Maybe there was a lag of early adoption especially when compared to the tech early-adopters. Not so much anymore. Now there seems to be a critical mass of doctors online and a steady pace of innovation where a subset are trying the next new thing. I have lost hope that my doctor will jump on board. He comes from another time. Increasingly, I think of changing doctors not just to rid myself of his complete lack of interest but to sign on with a doctor looking for every advantage for patients and his business via digital innovation.

Physician 2.0: Doctors of Innovation

Pauline Chen MD had a great article in the NYTimes where she summed up her own use of social media benefits as:

"Social media has kept me connected with colleagues and a few former patients, allowed me to stay up-to-date with certain health care and medical education issues, and helped me to keep abreast of Web-based resources that might be useful to those I care for. It has also taught me a tremendous amount about the experiences of patients and caregivers, information I’m not sure I would have had access to had I not been engaged online."

Doctors in the US are online - period. And they are increasingly "social."

According to Bunny Ellerin at Interbrand Health: "Manhattan Research found that 99 percent of doctors are online daily, 85 percent maintain broadband in their offices, and 83 percent consider the Internet essential to their practice."

According to aseparate report from Manhattan Research, doctors are embracing three social media related behaviors (beyond Search): consuming video, blogging and podcasting. What's interesting is that the content creator core - that small percentage of doctors who blog - are not the young doctors you would expect.

"Perhaps even more interesting is the profile of the segment of physicians authoring blogs  oday–these are younger, savvier, online physicians, right? Wrong. Those with a voice online tend to be older with more professional experience– essentially representing the true “physician blogger” with something to say–while the younger audience may be more likely to listen and then perhaps join in the resulting conversation later."

Social Networks
Increasingly physicians are joining physician-specific social networks like Sermo, Ozmosis or Social MD or even NING. And its not the same blogging doc who's joining according to the Manhattan Research report,

"Contrary to the population of physicians posting professional content online, thisgroup tends to be slightly younger than the average physician today. Another interesting finding is that female physicians are significantly more likely than their male counterparts to engage in online communities with other physicians. Also, physicians in the West seem more apt to engage in conversation and community online than their peers in the Northeast. Finally, physicians based in academic medical centers are significantly more likely to participate in online communities with physicians–perhaps viewing the online channel as simply an extension of their peer-to-peer communication with their colleagues in the halls and corridors. And it’s not just online community that piques their interest–almost all physicians participating in online communities report they regularly exchange email with other physicians."

Twitter 
Like other forms of social media that came before, doctors are adopting Twitter and experimenting how to use it in their daily practice. For bloggers, it becomes a way to announce longer content on their blogs. For all, it's a way to recommend relevant links. Check out the Yahoo pipes that bundles the "doctors on Twitter" into a single feed - I have published at the bottom of this page. .

Pauline Chen MD had spoke in her article in the NYTimes about a particularly poignant case with a patient who may have benefited from the more "always-on" relationship possible via social media platforms to get the support to maintain their regimine. I found it interesting that most of Pauline's references to social media-active physicians were Twitter handles (vs. blog urls).

She seems open to trying anything that might help her practice and is able to connect the dots to patient experinces that might have been enhanced if only the old way could be improved:

"Social media platforms can turn 10- or 20-minute doctor’s visits into an ongoing dialogue, where sources of information and, potentially, support are continually available to the patient and the doctor. “Platforms like Twitter can be powerful if doctors are a lot more active in disseminating their expertise,” Dr. Khozin said. “Patients are being bombarded with information online, but I don’t think all that information necessarily empowers them. You also need expertise.” "

What's the next innovation even as more doctors adopt social networks, Tiwtter and other social media conventions?

Top Pharma Social Media Examples

Thanks toJonathan Richman (no, not that Jonathan Richman) there is a great list of examples of pharma using the social Web. In the spirit of his "wiki" - add any thing you know of that is not on his list. Great work from Jonathan and a great resource.

See Social Media Pharma examples here >

Pharma: Don't Wait For the FDA

The phramaceutical industry has long felt itself "unique" due to regulations that hold it back from full frontal social media activity. Adverse events reporting, fair practice and DTC rules were in place before twitter, before facebook and even before or oblivious to blogs. Still most pharmas feel they are uniquely ill-suited to listen to patients and spark conversations. Some use social media platforms as a way to distribute content. Some are getting over their terminal uniqueness and seeing that there are lessons to learn in all directions. Also, everyone knows the FDA will not blaze new trails here and will only act to respond to the worst of missteps. So everyone looks to their pharma brothers and sisters to innovate first.

Media Post covered an interview between EyeonFDA and well, the FDA, this past month. As you might expect, they are not passing judgement on anything:

"The upshot is that the FDA doesn't categorically prohibit pharmaceutical companies from engaging in social media. "It's not the medium, it's the message," explained Dr. Jean Ah Kang, special assistant to Tom Abrams at the FDA's Division for Drug Marketing, Advertising and Communications, in charge of Web 2.0 policy development." 

"Even so, it's likely that big pharma will remain reticent about plunging into social media marketing, barring more explicit guidelines from the FDA."

Pharma Marketing Blog covered this interview and the keynote at the eMarketing Summit where Sanjay Koyani, Director of FDA Web Communications, gave a keynote.

"On both occasions pharma eMarketers had their ears perked up to hear what the agency had to say about regulation of pharmaceutical marketing on the Web and especially on social networking sites.

On both occasions, we were disappointed."

Don't Wait

Can pharma look to other markets for lessons? Is it all moot because of their unique situation? A few pharmaceutical companies have been experimenting with communities, corporate blogs, sponsored conversations around issues (not products), and content distribution via YouTube and Flickr. And considering some of the jam-ups in traditional marketing where a pharma here or there has taken it on the chin for mistakes, it would seem about time for some real trailblazing in social media. If there legal teams are allowing them to take risks with traditional advertising then surely they can push the envelope a bit in social media.

• Don't wait for the FDA

• Don't wait till your nearest competitor hits a homerun
• Don't wait until the economy recovers (long wait)
• Stop considering your situation unique
• Look to all sorts of businesses for lessons-learned and do the hard work of finding the application to your own situation
• Build the capacity to try pilot programs to accrue learning and data

How Transparency Via Digital Can Help Consumer Packaged Goods

Do you want to know what ranch your steak came from? Are you as interested in where your eggs come from and whether they are free range chickens? For many products 'provenance' is inherently important. Coffee and wine come to mind. Wine drinkers care about where the grapes come from, the nature of the winery, and even the reputation of the people making the wine. Good wine is defined by these things (oh, and taste, or the experience of the product).

Some people have a growing interest in understanding where their products come from in order to support sustainable and human-rights best practices - call it "social good best-practices." Some care for real or perceived health reasons - simple, unprocessed food must be healthier for you. These concerns may be growing but have not reached mainstream status yet. Nor are they likely to be especially now that we are in the long recession where price and value are the deciding factors at the store shelves. Still, an influential few will make their choices in alignment with their commitment to be 'part of the solution" versus the problem. I mean, even the White House planted a fruit and vegetable garden.

Beerenberg Farms in Australia now helps consumers track and understand the sources behind their jams. They introduced an online application called Provenance Pathway.  Consumers can type in a label code and learn where the ingredients came from and a little about the process from field to shelf. They do two other great things online:

• They tell us the story of Beerenberg Farms and the family behind it all.

• They use the social Web as their platform linking to videos in their YouTube Gallery, their Facebook profile (180 fans) and images in their Flickr gallery.

One thing worth changing? The voice of some of the content still has too much of that 'stagey'marketing tone. You imagine someone taking marketing copy and trying to humanize it vs. just starting with a clean slate. still, I am guessing they will get the hang of it as they get into conversations with customers.

Transparency Builds Trust (and, therefore, loyalty)

I eat jam. It's one of the few sugary foods I still consume and I like good jam. Knowing the story and being able to track the ingredients is something I actually might do once or twice. By that point Beerenberg would earn my trust. I wouldn't use the app beyond that but I would tell a friend. 

note: thanks to one of my favorite resources in the "trend" tab of our The Daily Influence: Springwise, one of the best trend spotting sources out there.

 

How Can Mass Brands Benefit?
I don't know how the scale of Beerenberg compares to the big CPGs of the world beyond the obvious - they are a small to medium sized business versus a collosal enterprise (think P&G, Unilever, Cargill, etc...). We hear a lot from social media pundits that mass brands ought to adopt what the pundits themselves have proved - personal branding via social media can make you known. But practically speaking, how can a mass brand adopt the lessons from Beerenberg when, by necessity, their products may be made in a more industrial fashion with stainless steel and plastic substiting for wooden casks or inefficient jars?

CPGs can find the story in their people. Behind the scenes in the test kitchens, laboratories and supplier farms are passionate "creators" trying to make great product and solve problems. Mass brands may not have the benefit of the folksy personality but they are doing something we all need and want even when we don't realize it: they are democratizing great food. They are expected to figure out ways to get more people good food. And for that, most people understand there will be a mass-production model that employs less picturesque production.

Let the passionate people tell the story. Show the parts of sourcing and production that you can.People are curious and they do respect that type of transparency. It may cause the brands to recognize parts of sourcing and production they want to change. There is a "bar' that the public will not allow the brand to dip beneath. But that is why brands are valuable - because they mean something not because marketing tricked people into thinking they mean something.   
 

more:

• Why provenance matters to people and community from iVillage UK
• Some businesses make provenance the main tent of the brand
  

Inside the Centocor Blog

Melissa Katz and Michael Parks from Centocor talked with a few of us and John Mack (thanks to JM) about their new blog:CNTO411 . It follows in the footsteps of very few, most notably Marc Monseau at J&J. That means they are still on the leading edge. Injecting social media into the communications practices (forget about the marketing side) remains a huge challenge throughout the industry. I remain convinced that a few fearless folks like Melissa and Michael are the key to introducing change. I mean not only do they likely have legal and their internal stakeholders nervously watching but they will inevitably be a lightening rod for the social media purists who will analyze their every move and comment vociferously.

Why now?
Melissa referred to their experience launching the film InnerStates and hearing a little bit of noise from John Mack about inviting him and other bloggers. This and other experiences convinced them there was a valuable collection of conversations and influencers and it was time to jump in.

The name?
CNTO411 - that's how they mark product launches - "CNTO". The 411 is "information."

What do they want to achieve?
The site is a corporate site. They may talk about products but it's not the core intent. They do not plan on using it as a marketing site at all. It should be a discussion about disease and conditions. Melissa will be the primary blogger (this is her primary job). They may have guest bloggers.

What might success look like?
Having a pretty fluid conversation going, gaining credibility in the blogosphere. They really want to walk-the-walk of social media.

Summary
It sounds like they are using this as a first step to get experience with social media within the organization. I asked Melissa whether the blog was a conscious attempt to give others within the organization some feel for social media - to gain confidence and understanding. The answer was simple - "absolutely" 

Neither Michael nor Melissa were very specific about the audiences they are trying to reach or how the blog will focus on topics. Sounds about right for a pharma. I love their openness about where this might go. Seemingly little efforts like this (I know it was probably a big lift to sell-in) will go a long way to introducing innovation in the pharmas not just communicate but behave. 

   

WeMedia 08/Miami: Digital Health Entertainment

Humana's Grant Harrison is VP of Integrated Consumer Experience. He is doing some really cool things.

They are investing in many initiatives that could be grouped under 'health entertainment'. Think of games that require kids to run around the house to get to the next level. What's really cool is that they are investing in bringing Velib bikes to the US the way that 20K bikes were distributed across Paris.

Very cool idea for a Humana to support. I wonder how much word of mouth that will spark (never mind 'earned media').