Notes from the Back of the Book

A New Reality in DTC Advertising?

The last few months, I've been deeply entrenched in "Execution" for an important client. So needless to say, I've been thinking A LOT about what it takes to move from strong strategy to superb execution, and more specifically, what it takes to achieve what I call "High Return Execution" (HRE).    Look for more thoughts on HRE in the upcoming weeks... (And my sincere apologies for the resulting lack of blogging and staying connected with many of my friends' blogs these last few months)

Today, I want to share a personal experience.  Last week my team led an advertising shoot for a prescription product's new multi-channel campaign we are intimately involved with.  There was much to feel good about - the creative idea tested very well and is strong. We also had a terrific creative and production team, a wonderful photographer who we've all worked with before, and we were shooting in a venue that turned out to be magical...not to mention the beautiful picture- perfect, dry sunny days ... [How can you  complain about spending two days on an unspoiled 200 acre ranch in northern California?]

But as I flew home from the shoot, reflecting upon the previous few days, I kept feeling there was something even more special ... something that I rarely feel after shoots ... and then I realized ...

Our work included real patients and in some cases their families as well.   We shot three different print executions using three different patients.  In one case, the mom brought her daughter who was not only proud of her Mom, but also proud to be photographed. 

You might ask, what's the big deal?  As everyone knows, so often in branded consumer and healthcare advertising -- TV, print, web etc., ads are created using models or professional talent.  Certainly, using real patients or ‘real people' adds a great deal  of complexity and tension, as these shoots require much prep and planning, and have a sizeable cost ... Using real patients means you're never quite sure until ‘it's a wrap' -- that you have captured the idea you are trying to communicate ... It also takes more time and requires special artists and production types to work with real patients...

We decided to use real patients because the idea behind our ‘first person' campaign  ‘demanded' authenticity.   Lest you dismiss this as just a current buzzword, keep listening. These are real patients who are living their lives to the fullest extent they can, and genuinely grateful for their prescription product's ‘contribution' to their improved health and QOL. Additionally, these patients were willing to step up and be photographed about a medical condition that is embarrassing to most and difficult to manage.  These patients weren't participating in these ads because they were going to get rich (hardly), they were participating in my client's campaign because they are thrilled to be living their lives in a fuller way -they had reached a milestone so to speak, and wanted to give back. They each stepped up in the hopes of leading others like themselves to try to get the right help for themselves (It may be this prescription product, or it may be another)... to help spread the word, and bring hope and attention to a medical condition that gets little attention otherwise...

Each patient joined in the production process...they were not just models that showed up for their ‘job'; they were on mission, ... tasked to rise to the challenge of being center stage and photographed...something that none of them had ever done in their lives...and in itself a huge personal risk.  There were times that you could feel the wheels in their heads spinning, "this sounded like a good idea when I was in the comfort and safety of my home, but now that I'm here, this is more than a little overwhelming and scary ..."

As a result, everyone on site joined in to support these patients to be able to do their personal best ... It was also a continual reminder to each of us why we were at the shoot ... certainly to capture DTC advertising and patient communications for our client, but it was more than that ... we were there to shoot a new campaign that would  help the many patients with this condition that are still not feeling their best ... to help spur and initiate awareness, education and dialogue so that these patients can participate in their own health decisions and have more enlightened discussions with their doctors ... The vulnerability was gripping.  I'm confident that we at the shoot will not be the only ones to respond.

It leaves me wondering what the increasing use of using real patients will mean for "direct to consumer/patient" advertising and relationship marketing in the future?  Are we witnessing the birth of a new standard that will demand real patients who are advocates for themselves and others? ... Who make a difference each day by being true participants in their health? Will consumers be touched by their 'less than perfect' delivery as actors and models?   

I suspect this trend is here to stay. The pressure is on to "come clean" when the ad suggests that it's a real patient and it isn't (See the Abilify example).  There's no faking ‘real patients' who are actively participating in their health; time will tell what impact they will have on our industry going forward--and how they potentially transcend  advertising and marketing...

My heartfelt thanks to the three patients who made a choice to join us this past week.  I learned with each conversation, and I hope they learned a little too.  I also made three new friends... :-)

See other examples of current DTC Print Ads Using Real Patients, click on image below

2010 Outlook: 10 Ways to Win With Patients and Improve DTC Efforts

[Full article: 2010 Outlook: Doom and Gloom For DTC? 10 Points for Winning with Patients, published in DTC Perspectives, December 2009]

Despite many gloomy predictions for DTC advertising and the pharma industry overall, there's never been a better time for marketers to forward their brands and consumers' lives with new thinking about what constitutes patient marketing in the 21st Century (DTC 21).  Ten prescriptions can help improve focus and strengthen DTC efforts in 2010.  Important media and technology trends are also "musts" to actively consider for those who want to bump impact and value.

1. Adopt an updated definition for DTC that considers the full picture of how consumers will interpret and interact with a brand TODAY. This calls for attention beyond "big bang" marketing spends, and begs for identifying meaningful levers to drive education and growth. DTC is no longer just an awareness or acquisition vehicle to move "eyeballs" through a linear marketing funnel; it's every influence and touch needed to bring new information and education, help convert, instill loyalty and inspire advocacy.
   
2. Consider "long-tail" marketing; don't be afraid to focus on smaller targets that matter. Long tail marketing has the potential to treat consumers as individuals with unique interests and needs.
   
3. Go to your consumer--surround them where they get their facts, learn, and socialize.  Today's consumer is not looking for your marketing messages.  Study after study points to both the growth of the Internet, and the fact that consumers and e-patients get their information from multiple sources. (The Social Life of Health Information - PEW Internet and American Life Project) Depending on your target, this suggests a mix of relevant touches and begs for the right combination of off line and on line media and social media tactics.
   
4. Move beyond selling to engaging and providing meaningful marketing and value. Look for new ways to extend patient value, and support a more positive customer experience along each and every touch point. This also means giving consumers and e-patients what they are looking for and not just your "brand sell". Engagement requires looking at each patient as a unique human being who, by the way, would "rather not e your customer" (After all, who wants to have a chronic condition and take medication for the trust of their life, whether it be your rand or a competitors?). Think hard how you might provide relevant value real-time, every time. To improve engagement, 6 C's are crucial:  1) Content that is based on meaningful insights and provides context; 2) Customization via new ways to personalize treatment, process or support; 3) Conversation is encouraged for better service, learning and sharing: 4) Confidence is built with trust and transparency; 5) Community Connectedness - directly or indirectly- create your own, or better yet, tap into an existing one; and 6) Consistent Commitment is demonstrated to your customer base--no one shot deals here.
5. Consumer power is a fact of life requiring brands and companies to walk and talk "patient-centered" -- consumers are finely tuned to what's valuable and authentic. Ask yourself one simple question over and over:  Will this bring meaningful value to our patients?
   
6. Keep your brand's strategic core strong and grounded, despite the onslaught of messages and tactics, and the speed with which they require action.  A strong core requires a compelling and relevant brand promise that focuses every strategy and tactic so they're synergistic and supportive. The payoff is staying on message by protecting the brand from chasing every new, cool digital and new media tactic coming your way.
   
7. Insist on elegant solutions that do more with less. Smaller budgets don't negate innovation and may have just the opposite effect in spurring new thinking.
8. Don't overlook the details. While they may seem small and trivial, find out which are important to patients and their families.  This can help instill better ROI efficiencies.
9. Refresh brand metrics and measurement to drive current brand objectives and initiatives. Think beyond traditional reach and frequency measures and try to ensure a flow of metrics and measurement from beginning to end of the patient "buying process" for maximum learning.
   
10. Be the best listeners in you category. Listen with vigilance, and act on learning across the organization. Listening, and what you do with your learning, is the responsibility of the entire organization.  Be sure that each 'tweet" or customer learning gets mapped back to a rightful "owner' in the organization.

In 2010, important media, social platforms and technology trends can't be neglected. Below are some helpful questions to ask as media and technology continue to quickly change (yes...an understatement!):

Pharma: Are you ready for 2010?  Despite continued budget tightening and generic growth, and open areas such as health  reform and  FDA social media and web guidelines, it's going to be a big year for those willing to step up and experiment with new ways of marketing and 'not marketing'...What do you think?

 

Other Suggested Reading:

The Long Tail: Why the Future of Business Is Selling Less of More by Chris Anderson. Wikipedia's summary of long tail here.

Pharma: Are Current DTC Ads Meaningful? The Next Evolution of Marketing My Book review.

The Next Evolution of Marketing: Connect with your Customers by Marketing with Meaning by Bob Gilbreath, Bridge Worldwide

Susannah Fox, PEW Research Center: The Social Life off Health Information, Twitter and Status Updated, Fall 2009

Pharma: Is Your Brand Patient Centered? 5 Critical Success Factors by Ellen Hoenig, MedAd News, November, 2009

I love You More Than My Dog: 5 Decisions that Drive Extreme Customer Loyalty In Good Times and Bad  by J. Bliss

Strong Brand Core: More Core Than Ever? 

Pharma: Is Your Marketing Designed to Engage and Educate or Sell? My book review of Listen First Sell Later by Bob Poole

Pharma: Do You Elegantly Use What You Have? My book review of In Pursuit of Elegance by Matthew E May

Photo Credit:  Courtney Justice/The Cournell Group

Pharma: Are Current DTC Ads Meaningful?

I just finished reading Bob Gilbreath's new book "The Next Evolution of Marketing. Connect With Your Customers By MARKETING WITH MEANING." Given my roots in package goods consumer marketing, I found the book and the examples ‘meaningful'... 

I whole heartedly agree that the next evolution in marketing is to move from ‘telling and selling' to providing value and ultimately, to improving people's lives.  I think too, this is one reason that so many consumer package goods marketers made the move to pharmaceutical and healthcare marketing-to help save and improve people's lives and well being...

What are marketers to do when consumers are not just immune to our messages, but they're ignoring us completely?

Create marketing that's meaningful.

What is meaningful marketing?

When your marketing is meaningful, people choose to engage with you in an exchange that they perceive as valuable. But engagement is only the beginning. Whatever your product or service may be, when your marketing is meaningful, the marketing itself adds value to people's lives, whether or not they immediately buy what you're selling. (This may cause a few gulps...but Bob Gilbreath goes on to promise that this is not just cause marketing...To be sure, making money and moving product are still the goal; if they aren't, it's not marketing.)

The bottom line for consumers is that they expect more from their brands on many levels--and the marketing with meaning model will help bring marketing more into the value equation.

Jonathan Richman at Dose of Digital wrote about some great ideas for pharma brands to consider and explore using marketing with meaning. So I thought I'd try something a little different to spark some further thought and dialog.

I took a look at DTC print ads over the last month  to see how they stack up to the book's Hierarchy of Meaningful Marketing.  Now we all know that looking at one DTC ad doesn't capture the 'whole brand's story'.  The print ad is only one step to driving action to the brand (or unbranded) website for more information and engagement...and a brand can run a 'campaign' of different ads (branded and unbranded), and use multiple media channels to tell a richer story...but it's a start.

And, if "every single interaction between a brand and a consumer is a marketing moment of truth" (Peter Blackshaw), is it not fair to look at what may be a brand's first touch, a DTC ad?

Yet, I feel the need to make at least one caveat.  Having sat in many a focus group for pharma brands, I can honestly say that for many consumers with a medical condition, or for their caregivers, learning about a new prescription product that may provide pain relief or prevent damage, is a HIGHLY valuable solution. This is an important distinction when evaluating DTC ads vs other ads for well known consumer goods...Additionally, unbranded ads have an easier time of providing more connected solutions by the nature of their goals and extra space due to lack of fair balance!

Having said that, I looked at the branded DTC print ads running over the last month in a variety of consumer publications (e.g., news, women's service, health, people, teen). I reviewed 35 print ads and attributed them to Gilbreath's three tiers of marketing that are increasingly meaningful to consumers:

• Solution marketing. Like the lower levels of maslow's hierarchy of needs, solution marketing covers basic household needs and benefits, for example, helpful offers, money savings, and hard rewards for purchase.
• Connection marketing. this represents a significant step toward building a bonding relationship between people and brands. It provides benefits beyond the basics of information and relevance to include something that is of deeper importance in the consumer's mind, ie., social outlets and creative expression.
• Achievement marketing.This corresponds to maslow's pinnacle of self-actualization by allowing people to significantly improve their lives, realize a dream, or positively change their community and their world.

Here's What I found:

Not surprising, most DTC print ads fall into the first tier-Solution marketing- by providing information and a trial incentive to encourage the first script. Many only make the first tier with the assumption that they're providing valuable information to help patients with their 'physiological and safety' needs through attribute and benefit messaging.

Of the 35 ads, I bucketed 31 into Solution marketing, of which 14 offered a trial incentive. (Of the ads with trial incentives, AcipHex, BenzaClin,  Symbicort and Yaz did the best jobs insuring that interested consumers would see the offer, and others like Concerta and DePuy used a BRC to help drive lead generation and trial offer engagement.)

In my opinion, four branded DTC print ads fell into Connection marketing, having made a stronger step toward building a bonding relationship between people and brands:

Crestor: focuses not just on the pill, but on the Crestor kit: information, tips and trial incentives. They also offer an interactive tour of an artery. (Can more be done to leverage consumer to consumer sharing, provide additional customization opportunities, and to continue to make heart health a wee bit more entertaining/fun?)

Epiduo acne treatment: highlights the interactive 'pathway to confidence' contest where they asked teens for ways that they build confidence. (Website very fresh. Can more be done to leverage this important idea about building confidence in teens which has the potential to be life changing?)

Toviaz: focuses not only on the pill, but the plan that can be shared with the doctor (Can more be done to provide more stuff for consumers to share with each other, more customization opportunities, and more fun, entertaining web interactions?)

Viagra: takes a different approach vs prior ads. This ad speaks to real insights and concerns for men, and speaks less about Viagra benefits and more about how to broach 'the talk' with their doctor. The ad also provides a fresh learning approach that may be able to be further leveraged on their website.

None of the branded DTC ads I reviewed accomplished what I believe Gilbreath was speaking to with his third tier: Achievement marketing...Of course there are other DTC programs in the market place that may have just not ran branded print this last month, or don't use print in their media mix--the subject of another blog...

Click on the images to view examples Ads/PDF download 

No doubt, a DTC print ad does not tell the whole brand story, and in many cases, consumers will go to the website where they may find more engagement and connection. Additionally, if the product is new, it may make sense to first communicate the brand's benefits...

Having said that, it looks to me like there is ROOM FOR IMPROVEMENT. Pharma DTC print advertising can and should evolve to providing more than basic product benefits to providing richer experiences and connections for consumers to share and feel good about. Brands should  take an inventory of all of their DTC touchpoints- online and offline- to be sure that each are doing their best to both reinforce the brand promise, and provide maximum value to the consumer.

Time to move from just selling to also helping...

What do you think? Any good branded print examples I missed in my 'non-scientific' point-in-time review, or that you want to share? Other thoughts on creating meaningful marketing?

Pharma: Is Your Marketing Designed To Engage And Educate Or Sell?

As Marketers, we've long been conditioned to "sell", also known as the fourth Marketing P: Promotion.  Increasingly, however, the world of Marketing is shifting from a model of selling and shouting to one of listening, engagement, dialogue and education. Pharma is no exception to this change.  A recent study by about.com outlined in eMarketer points to success with current pharma advertising, but also highlights opportunities for improvement that are consistent with the continued shift in consumer mindset.

Key Takeaways

Following diagnosis from their Physician, most consumers use the web to find more information about their condition, a smaller percent use search engines to better understand treatment options or the particular medication that they've been prescribed.  Only 35% trust what the doctor says and fill the prescription without further search or education.

Currently, more than four in 10 Internet users told About.com that pharma ads made them aware of treatment options and educated them about symptom and conditions; 17% felt like they could speak more knowledgeably with their doctor because of pharmaceutical advertising.

After seeing healthcare ads, 38% of respondents said they talked with their doctor and 36% researched the advertised drug online. In addition, 13% of Internet users visited the pharmaceutical company's Website.

When surveyed about what would catch their attention, Internet users were most likely to say info about specific conditions (29%) and medication side effects (28%); also information about how to cope with the condition (20%), followed by free trial offers (18%).

How Can Pharma Continue to Improve Engagement and Communication?

1. Combine 'relevant' education into every communication; surround the target consumer/patient with a mix of branded and unbranded communications, and branded and educational messaging. 
2. Consider where the patient is along the treatment pathway and customize engagement to reflect information and education needs. Adding a personalized touch can dramatically help improve trial or web sign-ups. (See more on Personalization in my next blog)
3. Don't be afraid to speak to the potential side effects; balanced benefit and risk information is what consumers (and FDA) want.  Most consumers recognize that along with the benefits of a particular treatment comes some side effect(s)--why not provide the information upfront, including potential ways to deal with the side effects...This might also begin to instill a bond of trust and authenticity...Moving forward, pharma companies will do well by providing easy to understand risk-benefit comparisons for consumers...
4. Shout the condition that your medication treats to increase stopping power. While this might sound obvious, many online and off line DTC ads continue to overlook the need to scream the condition they are treating. With the onslaught of messages that a typical consumer sees each day, this is a costly mistake, but one that is relatively easy to fix. (Marketers and Advertising Creatives alike often hate to shout out the condition thinking its redundant or isn't visually elegant, but its often the single best way to immediately grab your patients' attention. It usually takes one round of qualitative for marketers and their agencies to be convinced...)
5. Don't just focus on your medication--Help patients and their families treat and cope with the 'whole' condition and the 'whole' person.  This goes beyond providing a few tips or tools or links to third parties...and goes beyond any one advertisement.
6. Listen First-Sell Later.  Everyday consumers are telling  us that they don't want to be sold to or shouted at, but engaged in a meaningful conversation, to hear from others like themselves. How best to understand someone's needs and wants if not by listening first? 

Bob Poole has written a great book with many, thoughtful nuggets to consider: 

Customers and prospects know their problems much better than you do.  Don't make the mistake of thinking that you already have the solutions. To assume you know the solution before you really understand the problem, is like a physician writing a prescription before making a diagnosis. 

Learn to listen -really listen. It's how you establish trust, rapport, and relationships.

Listen. Create value. Follow through. Keep your word. Maintain the relationship. Listen more.

Stop being a salesperson. Become a solutions provider. You'll be much more productive. It's more fun. And, it's the right thing to do.

People have to buy YOU before they buy anything FROM you.

Burn your story into the hearts and minds of the people who want-who need-to hear it. We can all create and tell stories that are entertaining, educational, and emotional.

What kind of fun are you building into your business? When is the last time you did something fun with your customers?                                                                                                                                                                  

Pharma: Which do you do first, Listen or Sell?  As an industry, isn't it time we made listening a greater priority? If we listen first, won't engagement and increased sales follow? Thoughts?

Pharma: Should DTC TV Have A Place In Your 2010 Budget?

Everyday it seems that someone is reminding us of the demise 
of traditional DTC TV and broad based media in favor of the web and social media.

While web 2.0 continues to power health care today--critical to consumer health care information learning and sharing (How Social Are HC Consumers with their Info)--there are many who believe that traditional TV (when creatively executed) can still play a vital role, as part of the media mix, to help 'surround the consumer' and drive awareness, education and action, including engagement online and off. ( Trend Report 2009, MedAd News DTC Alive and Well,  May 2009, Magna Forecast, 2009) 

• Interestingly, the recent debut and success of Hulu.com's traditional TV advertising on this year's Super Bowl has many online leaders, including Amazon, Zappos and Kayak, reconsidering traditional agencies and offline tactics to help create 'fast' awareness and define more broadly what they do (Adweek: Online Brands Turn to Traditional Ads)..."What we've found is that if we layer in a little bit of off line brand advertising, it improves  the ROI of our online direct response campaigns," Zappos CEO Tony Hsieh said. (Many Pharma brands have also found this to be true; TV helps drive web efficiencies in addition to generating quick awareness and MD requests...)
• With the economic woes, it seems that more people are actually staying home and spending time in front of the tube--According to Nielsen, the average American watches 151 hours of TV in a month, an all time high (Daily Orange News).
• TV advertising continues to illicit a high degree of take action and trust. The 2009 Rodale Prevention Study reports that on average 33% of people who see any DTC ads talk about the specific medicine with their doctor that hey saw or heard advertised. (The eight year average is 33%, though the last four years have seen more year-to-year volatility. BTW, the study also shows continued growth of web use: 37% report discussing medical information they found online with their doctor.) Further, according to the latest Nielsen Global Consumer Survey: 62% of consumers said they trust TV advertising, equal to or better than all other forms of advertising, including print, radio, online banners etc. (but not equal to recommendations from people they know or from virtual friends)
• Over the last few years, the TV industry continues to experiment with some very interesting and creative formats to drive impact and engagement. (Adweek: Networks Try New Ways of Getting Viewers to Watch Ads; TV Ads are Less Effective) 

Last week, I stumbled upon Wayne Attwell's blog Integrating TV with Online Marketing where he was talking about how traditional media advertising (in this case TV), with it's diminishing efficacy and relevance, could be integrated into the new online marketing model.  He was proposing that marketers forgo the traditional 'reach and frequency' model in lieu of using the medium to introduce consumers to the online information pathway.  And then let the online 'word of mouse' take over assuming a quality product etc.

All this got me thinking about the use of TV in Pharma and whether it still offers an opportunity especially as DTC budgets shrink and there seems to be less and less mega brands and their corresponding 'mega' budgets.  Additionally, the increasing economic and generic pressures for branded pharma overall, are negatively impacting ROIs across the board, and expected to continue.

This all suggests that any use of TV needs to be effective and efficient.  Thinking about Pharma and Healthcare marketing, and the recent changes brewing in TV advertising, there now seem to be at least six different ways of executing TV:

1. Traditional Branded TV ads to drive awareness and MD requests. Branded TV planning is executed against the standard 'reach and frequency' models, and read with continuous tracking studies measuring brand and advertising awareness, and importantly, take action and change in brand sentiment etc...Likely, the branded TV campaign is part of branded print (beyond fulfillment of DDMAC regulations) and web banner ads, sponsorships, SEM etc.  This is the most expensive use of TV advertising and requires the largest media commitment.  But despite all the noise, TV can be very effective in driving brand awareness and action for the right target audience and product.
2. Unbranded Direct Response TV ads to drive response via a free informational offer or incentive. DRTV is generally bought on a cost per lead (CPL) and cost per qualified lead (QPQL) basis. Once consumers respond via phone or web, they can opt-in to further branded and educational relationship marketing streams. Since the only focus of these ads is to educate, communicate and romance an offer, they are generally the most efficient from a lead generation perspective and ensure motivated 'hand raisers' (much like the concept of web search...reaching a prospective patient who is interested enough to take action).  Unbranded ads can also appeal to a different segment of consumers who prefer to educate themselves and experience less "advertising sell" than those motivated by branded 'sell' ads. 

Another positive of DRTV is that it can generally be purchased with less lead time than print or network TV buys, and can be quickly 'turned off' if lead generation objectives aren't met.  Because lead gen is the primary objective, media budgets can be effective with a few million dollars or scale to larger dollars, but DRTV ads aren't competing to break through the clutter the same way that traditional branded ads have to. On the negative side, DRTV inventory can be an issue during certain times of the year or events, making it difficult to clear the number of ads that a brand may want to run to reach its lead gen goals. Further, because of the multi-step approach involved in opting-in to RM materials, time to action is generally less immediate than for a branded TV ad.

3. Direct Response Hybrid Branded TV ads to drive awareness, MD requests, but also some response to an informational or monetary offer. This type of ad may also be bought with a combination of traditional Reach and Frequency and/or Direct Response.  From my experience, the hybrid is just that, and will generally not achieve as efficient CPLs because there is less time dedicated to romancing the offer due to DTC fair balance. So it comes down to the particular brand's objectives (and in pharma's case often how much fair balance) whether this type of hybrid TV ad is viable or preferred vs. branded alone or offer only.
4. Branded Entertainment and Promotional TV adsto generate explosive awareness and drive online marketing and engagement. Here the goal isn't the standard reach and frequency, but to incite the target's attention and drive them to the web and/or social platforms for further dialog and relationship building. Often controversial in nature, these ads are developed, less for continuous and multiple exposures, and more for immediate impact and shorter runs. The difficulty here is that it can be hard to predict whether a particular campaign will generate the WOM or 'word of mouse' needed to pull off this kind of strategy, not to mention the production cost of TV ads these days...

Marketers outside pharma are aggressively experimenting with branded entertainment, including new ad formats in online TV shows, ads embedded in VOD, interactive TV ads and more...Assuming an excellent product/service, if a brand can produce a truly entertaining TV ad that ignites buzz and swift response of target consumers to continue the conversation off line, then Pharma can reduce overall TV media spending while still using TV for strategic advantages: immediate broad reach and bang...

5. Advertainment TV ads to encourage greater consumer interaction with TV content. The essence of Advertainment is the last minute addition of information to a TV ad in order to increase the topicality of the ad and to create an "as live" feel to communications. A major benefit is that it creates additional reward for the viewer, which can be either information-led or prize-led. Advertainment also allows an interaction with customers by using technology that updates the message on the ad throughout a program. Alternatively, advertisers can run a series of live interactive promotions during the ad breaks where viewers can vote via TXT, SMS, online or telephone. EG. Fuller's London Pride (beer) used advertainment TV to break through during the Rugby World Cup. The advertainment technology allowed Fuller's to incorporate the latest match scores within their ads during half-time and full-time- giving viewers communication with real currency. By the end of the campaign the brand had achieved its highest sales and brand share.Other E.G., Ford Focus, Action-ManAction Figures.This kind of advertising also has the potential to add value to an existing communications strategy and make the TV experience, and the brand, more exciting and surprising for the viewer, creating impact and WOM/PR opportunities. (Source: UK TV Toolbox, Thinkbox.tv

6. Reality TV ads seek their inspiration from documentary and reality TV techniques for innovative ways to emotionally engage consumers. E.G. For smokers trying to quit, a major comfort factor and motivator is knowing that others are having similar experiences. In Europe, Nicoquitin found a real-life quitter and aired her video diary in real time on TV, from her decision to quit onwards. These reality TV ads were broadcast in spots where the message would be most pertinent. People were engaged by the woman's journey; the brand achieved cut through in a cluttered market. Results:173k people pressed red to find out more, sales increased by 40% and tracking showed that the ad succeeded in maintaining peak season awareness levels out of season (Source: UK Innovative TV ad formats thinkbox.tv)

Building on existing local events and targeted marketing, Verizon FiOS took reality advertising one step further, creating My Home2.0 makeover/reality show that documents tech-challenged families learning to use the screens, gadgets, and tools that FiOS enables. The show provided a platform to unite previously disparate efforts, and to provide communications stream reflecting the family's stories-on line, on TV and in person-with FiOS as a subtle superhero. A third example: MTV partnered with Dove and Alicia Keys on a five-part micro-series that aired during breaks in The Hills and followed the lives of three young roommates in New York. (Source: Adweek Don't Touch That Dial. Networks Try New Ways)

2010 Planning:  While web and social media budgets will undoubtedly increase, and should, TV's proven effectiveness for certain targets shouldn't be overlooked.  What role should TV play:  awareness, response, entertainment, story-telling, engagement? Which of the above type(s) of TV ads make the most sense to help a brand achieve its objectives?

I've been part of many successful integrated TV campaigns. Recently, I was part of a new marketing effort for a small brand that stopping direct response TV in favor of a web and in-office marketing program... only to be disappointed with prescription sales...so it suggests to me that a well executed TV campaign can still be a viable element in the media mix.  The question is how to drive maximum effectiveness and efficiency...how for TV companies, clients and agencies to work together to create new ways to engage today's healthcare consumers...and how to continue the conversation online and in Social Media platforms.

Thoughts or considerations?

Traditional DTC Media Is Alive and Well--But Not In A Vacuum!

"Even as digital marketing channels and platforms become increasingly important and pervasive in Direct-to-Consumer (DTC) advertising, traditional 'mass' media channels can still be effective and efficient (especially for larger brands)... The key to success is a well-integrated marketing strategy that takes advantage of old and new media alike," writes  Steven Niles in the May issue of MedAd News.

While the industry largely continues to label DTC merely as 'broad-based advertising',  there are many who subscribe to DTC in the 21st Century (DTC 21) as a key strategy to educate and engage consumers through push and pull touches, including old and new -media and relationship building - tactics alike. 

Further, the decision to use traditional DTC media is not done in a vacuum--but depends on such factors as:

• the target consumer, including their attitudes and behaviors, and where and how to best reach them-- which media and platforms they frequent and have comfort with...
• the condition itself-- sufferer size, the treatment pathway, frequency of doctor visits, adherence and patient value, competitive frame, etc.
• the brand's objectives, positioning and platform and budget.
• the mix of media that it will interact and have synergy with...

Yes, DTC awareness media spending is down, and as budgets get squeezed, especially for smaller more targeted brands, web and social media strategies often make more sense than broad based DTC.

Yes, DTC is increasingly caught up in the public policy debate.

BUT--Traditional DTC still works well for the right brand as part of the right media mix and integrated strategy, often including branded and unbranded efforts and awareness and relationship building drivers.

Why throw the baby out with the bath water? Why always surround the debate with either traditional DTC or web when the choice can depend on what's right for the brand at a particular point of time and a mix of media and social media platforms working together to build a brand and satisfy a consumer?

Thoughts?

PS Full Disclosure: I'm quoted in the MedAd News Article...

New DTC Ad: Grow your eyelashes!

I was SURPRISED to see this new DTC print ad by Allergan for  Latisse--the first and only prescription product to help with "hypotrichosis"--another name for having inadequate or not enough eyelashes!

With the economy in the dumps and Pharma and DTC advertising under increasing scrutiny, here's a new print campaign for what might seem like a pretty trivial and 'soft' medical condition. Adding to this is the fact that they are using a celebrity endorsement in their advertising-Brooke Shields- which adds an extra level of scrutiny these days-- and they're advertising to the consumer within the first six months of introduction (I guess their thinking is that this is a safe cosmetic treatment and therefore shouldn't follow the latest PhRMA Guidelines. It contains the active ingredient of the glaucoma drug Lumigan, which is also made by Allergan.). 

They've tapped Brooke with terrific testimonial video and great 'before and after' photos (not retouched of course) demonstrating results at 12 weeks...hoping women will return to see her results at 16 weeks. (Honestly, I can't ever remember ever thinking that Brooke's eye lashes were ever deficient...I do remember her for her stand against postpartum depression which I think was greatly admired by many. ) There's also a fund raising effort for 'make a wish foundation' on the website.

Here's a pure cosmetic play in both look and feel and content-there's no medical information on the website tied to hypotrichosis.  With this current economic climate, can this DTC effort generate a strong ROI? 

Are there enough Women out there willing to embark on a once-daily prescription treatment that will:

• likely not be covered by insurance
• need to be taken everyday for 8 weeks before seeing the first results, and up to 16 weeks for full results
• need to be taken 'forever' in order to maintain the effect 

And since its early days in its lifecycle, there's the assumption of no hidden side effects down the road... (Botox Botulism)

While Latisse brings consumers choice, how do cosmetic campaigns like this fit into the current and future standards of DTC Marketing that are increasingly moving to engage and educate, facilitate patient conversations with doctors, encourage adherence-- and bring consumers an overall sense of greater hope and control over their own health?

Thoughts? 

 

To use a celebrity endorsement or not...only your hairdresser knows for sure.

The latest news that Kellogg plans to drop Michael Phelps (Advertising Age) is sure to further stoke the fires for those marketers either considering new celebrity spokespersons for their brands or deciding whether to extend contracts. As Ad Age reports, "One bong hit seen around the world, and Olympian Michael Phelps is watching at least one contract go up in smoke."

"Michael's most recent behavior is not consistent with the image of Kellogg. His contract expires at the end of February and we have made a decision not to extend it," according to a Kellogg spokesperson. This was the second 'faux pas'; the other occurred on a 60 minutes interview when Anderson Cooper raided Mr. Phelps' cabinets and found a box of Honey Nut Cheerios--a non-Kellogg brand...

Both these incidents point to important watch-outs for brands considering celebrity spokespeople. Consider: 

1. Is the celebrity's behavior and image consistent with brand and company values?  How confident are you that what you see at signing is what you'll get going forward...

2. Is the celebrity a 'genuine' user and supporter of your brand. Is there an authentic history of involvement? (And in the case of food and some other categories, if the endorser likes and uses more than one brand, is this transparent?)

3.  How many other endorsements is the celebrity involved with and what are his/her future plans? How genuine can an endorsement feel to your customers if the celebrity is endorsing multiple products/services...

4. What is the plan to leverage the spokesperson; is it significant and meaningful?--Otherwise, it may not be worth the contractual investment or risk.

The revised PhRMA Principles (Issued 12/2008 and going into effect March 2, 2009) while not very different than the initial guidelines, in this conspicuous-free environment, will no doubt further curtail the use of celebrity endorsements across the pharmaceutical industry (at least for brand specific initiatives).

Where a DTC television or print advertisement features a celebrity endorser, the endorsements should accurately reflect the opinions, findings, beliefs or experience of the endorser. Companies should maintain verification of the basis of any actual or implied endorsements made by the celebrity endorser in the DTC advertisement, including whether the endorser is or has been a user of the product if applicable. (PhRMA Principles, December 2008)

And with new FTC guidelines on celebrity endorsement also expected in 2009, the use of celebrities in pharma and all industries will undergoe added scrutiny, necessitating more upfront rigor before taking on the added uncertainty.

Having said that...I have to say that I am a huge fan of Boniva's DTC campaign which leverages Sally Fields!  I hope they won't drop her unnecessarily due to these outside pressures if she continues to engage their audience and spur women to become more educated about Osteoporosis (and Boniva)...

What are your thoughts?

 

Pictures: M Phelps: Courtesy of Ad Age; Boniva print ad is not their full ad with ISI and Brief Summary.

When in doubt, include a dog...in your advertising!

Now that it's business as usual following Sunday night's amazing Super Bowl game, its hard to resist engaging in the talk about the TV ads. If you're like me, I couldn't resist checking out what Advertising Age had to say Monday morning and through out the week. (Click here to see any of the ads again.)

What's interesting is that the 'experts' favored such ads as the Audi 'Chase',   Hyundai's 'Assurance', Coke Zero 'Mean Troy', CareerBuider's 'Tips', Coke's 'Avatar' (by the editors of Creativity).

Bob Garfield's favorites were Monster.com, Coke Zero: 'Mean Troy', Denny's mobsters and hulu's ad claiming to be able to 'rot your brain more efficiently than TV'.  And perhaps that Cash4Gold would most likely have the best ROI despite being one of the worst pieces of 'creative'...

Hopefully, its unanimous that teleflora.com was just down right mean.

While the prediction was that Super Bowl advertising would be overshadowed by the economic downturn and not be edgy--of the 33 brands, by Bob Garfield's count, only 4 made reference to it:  Bud light, e-trade, Hyundai's 'Contract', and Cash4Gold.  Interestingly, media-research firm Innerscope concluded that the most "emotionally engaging" ads--surprisingly or not--were those that in one way or another channeled concerns about the economy.  That CareerBuilder and Cash4Gold ranked highest in the firms subconscious scale (they gage a person's emotional response through biometric vests) only speaks to what many already know; people are worried about their finances! (The Top Five Most 'Emotionally Engaging' Super Bowl Ads)

But none of the experts chose the TV ad that consumers rated the most-liked or most-recalled...According to Nielsen TV ad ratings, the number one ad liked and recalled most by consumers was the Budweiser 'Clydesdale Stick' ad where the Dalmatian and the Clydesdale play a game of fetch.  The second ad most likeded was for humor-filled Doritos. So what does that tell us?

BTW, Super Bowl XLIII 2009 was the MOST WATCHED TV program in history, with 151.6 Million viewers tuning in for all or part of the game, and an average viewership of 98.7 Million.  At $100K per minute or $3Million for a :30 spot, this translated to just over a $30 CPM.

And at $3Million for :30 seconds, there were no  pharmaceutical DTC takers in this year's Super Bowl...This isn't surprising given most DTC ads are :60 so a $6MM price tag for one spot is steep...or that the visability of the Super Bowl was definitely not the politically correct place to be this year...or that the Super Bowl's creative stakes by and large preclude Rx product advertising at least in its current form...

Which were your favorites? Worth the steep price?  It's hard to imagine more than a few brands were able to extract $3mm+ worth of engagement...and I couldn't agree more with Bob Garfield...too many Super Bowl commercials are "too clever by half"...the brand message gets completely lost...taco bell being a prime example.

Until next year...