Adam Cohen of Rosetta wrote an article today for Ad Age examining the implications of Google Sidewiki for Big Pharma. As Cohen accurately points out, the pharmaceutical industry faces a litany of issues when it comes to social media such as the reporting of adverse events, legal communications regarding a brand, etc…And the thing to remember is: just because the words did not come directly from the company, it can still be held liable. This applies to everything from blog comments on a company-sponsored site to emerging tools such as Google Sidewiki.
You can imagine then, that Google Sidewiki opens up a huge can of worms for pharmaceutical companies. With comments likely to appear on their site, and in some cases already appearing, how are they obligated to respond—if at all?
Marketing, IT, legal and PR executives are facing a significant quandary when it comes to dealing with Google Sidewiki. And with no FDA guidance to fall back on, the question is: who will be the first pharma company to risk a slap on the wrist by dealing with this issue head on? And that is the key difference between Google Sidewiki and other social media tools. With most social media tools, pharmaceutical companies have the choice to remain on the sidelines and proceed cautiously when they deem the time is right. But if Google Sidewiki allows conversations to occur directly on a brand’s site, the choice no longer exists; a decision has to be made. Just as you wouldn’t want a herd of picketers in your backyard, pharmaceutical companies certainly don’t want chaos on their turf. Google has effectively forced the hand of Big Pharma.
And in some ways, maybe that’s a good thing. When given a choice, most pharmaceutical companies have preferred the friendly and familiar confines of the sideline over the new world of social media. Who can blame them? There are few examples of success and the FDA has not offered any indication on where it falls on the matter. To be sure: slowly but surely pharma companies are testing the waters, but those examples are the minority.
To complicate matters, the mass adoption of Sidewiki is still in question. As it currently stands, the tool is, as Doug Haslam puts it, a sort of parallel universe only viewable by those that have downloaded it. So while every consumer may not be able to view the negative commentary occurring on the Websites of companies like Amgen, there are enough to warrant consideration on how to respond.
While there is no clear cut answer, one thing is for sure, pharmaceutical companies need to consider the implications of social media tools such as Google Sidewiki. Is it time to finally leave the sideline and jump into the game? Time will tell.
Trackbacks /
Pingbacks