In yesterday’s post, I speculated that Google Sidewiki’s arrival on the social media scene may force the hand of Big Pharma into finally developing a social media policy.  As is to be expected, there are concerns around the implications of Sidewiki from a marketing standpoint and how it might tempt some marketers to cheat the system.  Some, such as the World of DTC Marketing, fear that marketers will attempt to post glowing comments about their brand under a pseudonym and have gone so far as to suggest that pharmaceutical companies should issue a policy that employees are forbidden from posting on Sidewiki or other social media sites.

Really?

The issue of transparency is not an issue confined to Sidewiki.  It’s not an issue confined to the pharmaceutical industry for that matter.  One of the basic tenants that underpin social media interaction is transparency. Posing as someone you are not, disguising your intentions and not revealing your employer affiliations are blatant affronts to this principle.  So yes, there is a risk that some ethically-questionable marketers will look to capitalize on tools like Sidewiki by posting false comments, but to issue a carte blanche statement around posting on social media sites is reckless.

As the World of DTC Marketing post points out, consumers have a general distrust of pharmaceutical companies.  To be sure, this makes engaging with pharma consumers online a tricky proposition.  It takes a company that is honest, informative and compassionate to gain any measure of success.  But the key is: engagement that both helps the company and helps the patient is possible—this is not a zero-sum game.  Preventing all posting on social media sites eliminates a prime opportunity to restore some of the trust the industry has unquestionably lost.