Pharmaguy's Insights Into Drug Industry News
185.8K views | +36 today
Follow
Pharmaguy's Insights Into Drug Industry News
Pharmaguy curates and provides insights into selected drug industry news and issues.
Curated by Pharma Guy
Your new post is loading...
Your new post is loading...
Scooped by Pharma Guy
Scoop.it!

Another Buzzword: "Influencer Marketing." Does It Pass the "Authenticity" Smell Test?

Another Buzzword: "Influencer Marketing." Does It Pass the "Authenticity" Smell Test? | Pharmaguy's Insights Into Drug Industry News | Scoop.it

With it’s massive growth, proliferation on difficult-to-control social media platforms, and the oftentimes contradictory language from influencer marketers themselves, influencer marketing has become something of a wild west—something that, if influencers and marketers aren’t careful, could end up hurting the longterm prospects of the industry as a whole.

 

The practice is another form of native advertising, except it relies on social media influencers rather than in-house advertorial. Native advertising on publisher sites has come under fire for sometimes deceiving and confusing readers. Our 2015 study, showed that 48 percent of respondents felt deceived by native advertising.

 

So far, influencer marketing has escaped much of the same criticism.

 

In December, the FTC finally released an updated version of guidelines for native advertising, asking publishers to include a variation of “Ad,” “Advertisement,” “Paid Advertisement,” or “Sponsored Advertising Content” in the beginning of an article or video. Most framed the guidelines as an attempt to reign in native advertising on digital publications. (The FTC’s use of “native advertising” as an umbrella term for any sort of promotional material that’s not a traditional ad probably didn’t help.)

 

In a Digiday article, Todd Krizelman, co-founder and CEO of MediaRadar, an ad data firm, estimated that only 30 percent of publishers were in compliance with the rules and that 26 percent do not disclose at all.

 

But few considered the ramifications of the new guidelines on influencer marketing, which is subject to the same rules.

 

“They are looking for very explicit call-outs,” Krizelman said. “They want to see the words ‘This is an ad’ or ‘Paid advertisement.’ They do not want to see things like, ‘Presented by.’ Today, if Kim Kardashian is posting [an ad], she may just post it. No one would know if she was paid or not paid.”

 

“The FTC and other regulatory authorities are very concerned about influencer and native advertising,” said Andrew Lustigman, an attorney at Olshan Frome Wolosky who specializes in advertising and marketing. “Because the message is now coming from a third party, regulators want to make sure that consumers know that there is business relationship between the parties so that they can evaluate the message with that in mind.”

 

Unfortunately, this is anything but standard practice.

 

When you browse influencer marketing best practices, “trust” and “authenticity,” are two words that constantly appear. A February 2016 study by eMarketer suggested that influencer marketing has become more popular, in part, because of young people’s trust in social media stars, who they tend to see as more authentic than a brand or an advertisement.

 

“The key word that I’m coming back to in everything I talk about with influencers is authenticity,” said Todd Cameron, head of content and strategy at influencer marketing software company TapInfluence.

 

Trustworthy influencer marketing is only possible when social influencers disclose, boldly and proudly, that what they’re doing is a paid advertisement. If the brand or the influencer try to hide this fact, they risk undermining consumer trust for both parties.

 

Even if influencers and marketers continue to deceive consumers, there’s little doubt that more regulation—and better clarified regulation—from the FTC is coming.

Pharma Guy's insight:

I've docmented many cases where pharma uses celebrities to market its products. But when social media is involved, other influencers -- e.g., patient bloggers -- are also employed. For more on that read "Transparency is Good in Theory, But Not in Practice"; http://bit.ly/bloggertransparency 

more...
Friilance's curator insight, May 6, 2016 3:47 PM

Another Buzzword: "Influencer Marketing." Does It Pass the "Authenticity" Smell Test?

Scooped by Pharma Guy
Scoop.it!

What If FDA Were as Powerful as FTC?

What If FDA Were as Powerful as FTC? | Pharmaguy's Insights Into Drug Industry News | Scoop.it

FTC has powers far beyond those of mortal FDA -- it can impose fines, force the liquidation of assets, and put liens on property to collect settlement fees, all of which the FDA cannot do -- or has never done to my knowledge.

And the FDA is powerless to go after marketers of dietary supplements. According to an entry in wikipedia: "Because FDA is only given as much authority as Congress has granted the agency, the Agency cannot take certain actions outside of its mandate. One such area where this has caused confusion is with dietary supplements. Unlike drugs, the FDA does not pre-approve dietary supplement on their safety and efficacy. FDA can only take enforcement action against dietary supplements only after FDA discovers that a certain dietary supplement is unsafe."


The FTC, however, has the power and recently demonstrated that power by pursuing civil and criminal cases against more than 100 makers and marketers of dietary supplements. As part of the sweep, several people were actually arrested on criminal charges! For more on that read "Justice Department and Federal Partners Announce Enforcement Actions of Dietary Supplement Cases."


Whereas FTC imposes criminal penalties and fines, FDA sends letters.

more...
No comment yet.
Scooped by Pharma Guy
Scoop.it!

Only 20% of Teva's Illegal Pay-to-Delay Profits Goes to US Treasury

Only 20% of Teva's Illegal Pay-to-Delay Profits Goes to US Treasury | Pharmaguy's Insights Into Drug Industry News | Scoop.it
The FTC hopes to send "a very strong signal' to pharmaceutical companies that the agency will continue its fight against pay-to-delay deals after reaching a $1.2 billion settlement with Teva Pharmaceutical.


The agreement marks the first time the agency, which has been aggressively policing pay-to-delay settlements between drug makers, has recovered any money on behalf of consumers and others who pay for medicines, such as pharmacy chains and health plans. The settlement was reached just as the FTC was about to square off in federal court in Philadelphia against Teva.

Pharma Guy's insight:


ROFL!  Re this comment: $1.2 Billion comes out to less than 20% of the Unjust Earnings Cephalon and Frank Baldino made off the pay-to-delay scheme - which they learned how to do from a symposium held by a DC law firm. Baldino is laughing in his grave.


As a former Cephalon executive said: “We were able to get six more years of patent protection. That’s $4 billion in sales that no one expected,” according to the lawsuit filed by the FTC.


A Teva spokeswoman writes us that the drug maker was “pleased to reach” the deal with the government.Yes, I would be pleased also! In Pay-to-Play Pharma Monopoly it's Pay "$200", don't go to jail

more...
No comment yet.
Scooped by Pharma Guy
Scoop.it!

Watch John Oliver absolutely destroy Dr. Oz

Watch John Oliver absolutely destroy Dr. Oz | Pharmaguy's Insights Into Drug Industry News | Scoop.it

This past week has been rather embarrassing for celebrity health guru Mehmet Oz — or just Dr. Oz to fans. He was taken to task in front of Senate for selling, in his own words, a "magic weight loss cure for every body type." Oz's testimony was mainly a whirlwind of self-contradiction, telling Senators that there was no such magical cure after all.


Last night, John Oliver walked through the highlights of the proceedings, adding, "If you want to keep spouting this bullshit, that's fine, but don't call your show Dr. Oz. Call it Check his Shit Out with some Guy Named Mehmet."

But Oliver's main complaint here isn't with the weight loss-peddling doctor. It's with the organizations, lawmakers, lobbyists and the powerful dietary supplement industry that allow him to do that. "Dr. Oz is just a symptom of the problem," he said, explaining the relative and terrifying freedom that supplement companies have when it comes to giving us things like Dr. Oz's snake oil.

Pharma Guy's insight:


Once again, it's the fake news shows that inform us more about the issues than real news shows. Oliver does a great job, BTW, of explaining why the FDA cannot regulate dietary substances. For more on that, read: If FDA were as Powerful as FTC

more...
No comment yet.
Scooped by Pharma Guy
Scoop.it!

FTC Reports Drop in Pay-for-Delay Deals Thanks to Supreme Court Decision

FTC Reports Drop in Pay-for-Delay Deals Thanks to Supreme Court Decision | Pharmaguy's Insights Into Drug Industry News | Scoop.it
Pharmaceutical companies entered into substantially fewer potential pay-for-delay drug patent settlements in fiscal year 2014, according to the FTC.


Pharmaceutical companies entered into substantially fewer potential pay-for-delay patent dispute settlements in fiscal year 2014, according to a new FTC staff report.


The report summarizes data on patent settlements – which can arise between brand and generic drug companies – filed with the FTC and the Department of Justice during FY 2014 under the Medicare Modernization Act of 2003. Generic drugs often cost less than brand drugs, helping to make medicines affordable for millions of American consumers and to keep health care costs down.


“Consumers are better off when there is more competition from lower-priced generic medicines,” said Debbie Feinstein, Director of the FTC’s Bureau of Competition. “So although it is too soon to know if these are lasting trends, it is encouraging to see a significant decline in the number of reverse payment settlements.”


The number of these potentially anticompetitive deals has fallen significantly following the Supreme Court’s landmark antitrust decision in FTC v. Actavis in 2013. The total number of such deals filed with the FTC has dropped to 21 in FY 2014 from 29 in FY 2013, and 40 in FY 2012 prior to the Actavis ruling. The FTC staff report for FY 2014 represents the first annual snapshot of such deals following the Actavis decision.

Pharma Guy's insight:

Pay-for-Delay deals are said to compensate for drugs going off patent (see http://bit.ly/1RnpaVU). For an example of how this works, read "Branded Pharma Wages War Against Generic and OTC Medicines: COLCRYS vs. colchicine Case Study"; http://bit.ly/1Ig3Tc5 

more...
No comment yet.
Scooped by Pharma Guy
Scoop.it!

FTC to FDA: Do Your Job! ISS - It's the Science, Stupid!

FTC to FDA: Do Your Job! ISS - It's the Science, Stupid! | Pharmaguy's Insights Into Drug Industry News | Scoop.it

The US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) recently announced it was considering changing the way homeopathic products are regulated and asked for input on whether its current regulatory framework for homeopathic products was sufficient.


Now, the Federal Trade Commission (FTC) is weighing in, calling on FDA to "consider amending or repealing its framework for homeopathic medications."

The issue, as FTC sees it, has to do with how over-the-counter homeopathic drugs are labeled and sold. Currently, FDA does not approve homeopathic drugs for safety or efficacy as long as they meet certain conditions, such as being sold "for self-limiting disease conditions amenable to self-diagnosis (of symptoms) and treatment," and are labeled for their intended use.


However, FDA does not require scientific or clinical data to back homeopathic products’ indications for use, which FTC says "may harm consumers and confuse advertisers."


FTC also says it has had issues with advertisers mistakenly thinking they "do not have to comply with FTC advertising substantiation requirements" if they meet the requirements in FDA's compliance policy guide.


Lastly, FTC says its research has shown that "most consumers do not understand homeopathy, how the FDA regulates homeopathic drugs, or the level of scientific evidence needed to support health claims for homeopathic products."

Pharma Guy's insight:

I would add that "most consumers do not understand Rx drugs, how the FDA regulates Rx drugs, or the level of scientific evidence needed to support health claims for Rx products." You may also be interested in reading "If FDA were as Powerful as FTC"; http://bit.ly/1JtRxZl 

more...
No comment yet.
Scooped by Pharma Guy
Scoop.it!

The Supplement Industry/FDA Revolving Door Keeps FDA Quiet About Amphetamine Dangers

The Supplement Industry/FDA Revolving Door Keeps FDA Quiet About Amphetamine Dangers | Pharmaguy's Insights Into Drug Industry News | Scoop.it

A new study makes public what the F.D.A. did not: the names of diet and workout supplements that contain the chemical BMPEA, which is similar to amphetamines.


The Food and Drug Administration documented two years ago that nine such supplements contained the same chemical, but never made public the names of the products or the companies that made them. Neither has it recalled the products nor issued a health alert to consumers as it has done with other tainted supplements. The F.D.A. said in a statement that its review of supplements containing the stimulant “does not identify a specific safety concern at this time.”


But public health experts contend that the F.D.A.’s reluctance to act in this case is symptomatic of a broader problem. The agency is not effectively policing the $33 billion-a-year supplements industry in part because top agency regulators themselves come from the industry and have conflicts of interest, they say. In recent years, two of the agency’s top officials overseeing supplements — including one currently on the job — were former leaders of the largest supplement industry trade and lobbying group.


Daniel Fabricant, who ran the agency’s division of dietary supplement programs from 2011 to 2014, had been a senior executive at that trade group, the Natural Products Association, which has spent millions of dollars lobbying to block new laws that would hold supplement makers to stricter standards. He left the F.D.A. last year and returned to the association as its chief executive. His current replacement at the F.D.A.’s supplement division also comes from the trade group


“To have former officials in the supplement industry become the chief regulators of that industry at the F.D.A. is like the fox guarding the hen house,” said Michael F. Jacobson, the executive director of the Center for Science in the Public Interest, a consumer advocacy group.

Pharma Guy's insight:


FTC has powers far beyond those of mortal FDA -- it can impose fines, force the liquidation of assets, and put liens on property to collect settlement fees, all of which the FDA cannot do -- or has never done to my knowledge.

And the FDA is powerless to go after marketers of dietary supplements. According to an entry in wikipedia: "Because FDA is only given as much authority as Congress has granted the agency, the Agency cannot take certain actions outside of its mandate. One such area where this has caused confusion is with dietary supplements. Unlike drugs, the FDA does not pre-approve dietary supplement on their safety and efficacy. FDA can only take enforcement action against dietary supplements only after FDA discovers that a certain dietary supplement is unsafe."

more...
No comment yet.