Serocloud.

INDICATIONS: If annoying graphic cloud device follows you around, discontinue use of Seroquel XR immediately.

The only way to sell pharma.

And I’m not even sure it does that based on the views. But I saw this Danika Patrick banner ad and clicked. Yeah, shoot me. But, I just wanted to see NOW what brand wants to exploit her gender for NASCAR. Fully prepared to yell OKAY, ENOUGH ALREADY—WE GET IT. SHE’S A FUCKING NASCAR DRIVER, I didn’t hate what I saw here at Drive4copd.com. Mostly because it has a lot of stars for a pharma brand talking openly about real health issues. Wherein I now explain drug ad laundering thusly:

With direct to consumer advertising rules for pharma in the United States being regulated like nothing else, resulting in ultra-precise wording as to what you can and can’t say in terms of your drug’s *possible* benefits, the workaround is that you often see unbranded sites like this talking about the cause or general disease slash affliction—not any one particular drug.

Here, it’s chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD). It’s not a completely generic approach though because you only have to check for the drugmaker behind the site in the footer copy, then trace their product lines at their actual site to see what drug they’re pushing. OMFG! Look what you find: Spiriva, Atrovent, Combivent, Berodual Bronchodual Duovent, and even a delivery device like Respimat, each with their own websites. But Michael won’t be holding up any inhaler today kids.

Given the FDA handcuffs in general, most pharmaseutra ads are an orgy of hackneyed metaphors. Here, the sputtering car theme is typical. Too bad, because the actual stories are compelling without that shit. (Michael Strahan is actually okay to listen to because he’s not screaming for a change.) That’s the problem with pharma though: Agencies get jammed by FDA regulations and end up hitting the consumer over the head with generic, repetitious copy that treats you like a 3-year old.

Here endeth the lesson.

It’s a cancer vs. pharma throwdown!

This is the problem with pharma.

The ads for the diseases themselves are typically more powerful than ads by any pharmaceutical company with the drugs to combat them. Yet, here in the U.S., the regulations governing the latter almost guarantee a direct-to-consumer advertising (DTC) that is at times insulting, and at others, bordering on farcical. (By the way, the only other country in the world to allow DTC is New Zealand.)

Before I chum the waters of the pharma advertising debate, focus on how intense this “Fight Back” campaign for the Canadian Cancer Society is. You gotta love Canada. They give us Shatner, Rush and good PSAs. The English version of the DDB campaign above is different in tone from the French version here, (with site), and has more intensity in my opinion. (The melodrama in the French version is working overtime thanks to the art film-like cabaret piano.)

Minor things though. These are powerful. Both use real people to act out scripted and poignant stories of the fight against cancer by either themselves or loved ones.

For its part, cancer is personified as coming from the viewer’s point of view. (Having had a family member lose said fight, the English version resonates more for me, due in no small part to a more intense background track.)

Time to chum.

The pros and cons of pharma ads can be debated all day: I’m right. You’re right. We’re all right. Let’s just assume though that pharma advertising is screwed in its present form.

The minute a brand talks about how their product might be the answer for the disease you have—or didn’t know you had—it comes under scrutiny for implying just those very claims, and rightfully so.

The current solution however, is to include a ton of legal copy that is supposed to give consumers the info they need to make informed decisions, (also known as fair balance).

Tell me how that’s accomplished in a :30 spot again?

The fundamental problem with this approach is that so much legalese needs to be included that it undermines what the ad was theoretically intended to do:

Educate people about the truly important stuff.

So basically, the main selling feature of most pharma ads becomes that it’s less harmful than its competition. (Your honor, I call Celebrex’s 2-minute warning as a witness.)

Isn’t that like saying Budweiser is better because it’s involved in less fatal traffic accidents than Miller?* Yet the only warning you see in beer or liquor ads is what... drink responsibly. Based on that logic, pharma should have the same type of warning: Use medicine carefully.

Instead of holding up work that features a rooster in your bed as rising above the competition because it started out as “unbranded,” pharma brands should focus on helping consumers sort through the bullshit. Going to Washington to lobby for the right to Twitter ain’t what I mean, either.

By the way, ALL pharma brands use the unbranded approach at some point. It’s not innovation—it’s how they bend the regulations without breaking them. For example, a microsite about headaches doesn’t mention the brand behind it.

When you click on it though, it takes you to another site that’s for the drug that works on... headaches. That this positioning and approach can win a Clio is absurd. It’s the equivalent of giving an award to a print ad simply because it appeared in a magazine.

(If you need more of a breakdown of other issues at work here, this consumer study highlighting the key differences is as good as any.)

Back to the cancer spot up top, this is where pharma needs to go.

Consumers end up being more confused than educated, certainly not helped by leaky faucet metaphors for erections or costumed characters for heart attacks.

As the Taxi spot for “Antiquing” showed, pharma can be truly funny. Likewise, these cancer spots show pharma can also be intense and emotional, just as living with cancer is.

When an ad works, it grabs you—how can it do that with 50 pages of mandatory?

*They would call this a hypothetical situation. Chill MillerCoors lawyers, chill.

Abott invents... the Abotts.

It’s more dark silhouette madness! Look closer, I swear that’s Dick Chaney pushing Wednesday Adams while grandma is tripping out over some butterflies. Damn, is this stuff for diabetes or depression?

But why is mommy biting the heads off my dolls?

I don’t know son, maybe she needs Pristiq.

(Via.)

They’re so cute at this age.

Whew. That was close. Almost went the entire summer without a kids spouting adult dialog cliche. I know I was boycotting contest coverage, but how can you say no to future painful itching? You can’t! NO, you can’t, can you. Psoriasis—it’s not just for breakfast anymore.

I give up.

When pharma tried harder.

Props to Zeke for this priceless find of vintage pharma ads. Pushing Methadone as mommie’s little helper, aw, gee, you shouldn’t have! Scroll down the site and be amused. Or amazed.

Tick tock Ty.

At first I thought, he’s used up 14:21 and counting in yet another commercial, this time for Adderall XR. But then I read further about how he had been diagnosed with everyone’s favorite affliction of the month, ADHD. Don’t I feel like a douche now. Naturally, telling his story would seem like a good way to build awareness of the problem. Speaking of puns though, I might have gone with something a little more themed around his first love: “When AHDH plans an unwelcome addition to your life, we’ll help tear it down.” Or something like that. I’m not a writer. Plus, I just made fun of a guy with an ailment who still has better hair than me. Based on that, I’m pretty sure Hell will vote me in on the first ballot.

Tags: Adderall XR, Ty Pennington

Yah-az, likeohmygodTOTALLY!

Second of three GOAWL spots. That would be for Yaz. I hate it on many levels. 1) St. Germain’s Sure Thing in the background. 2) Every line of dialog, like all pharma print and TV, is taken straight from the PI (prescribing info). 3) The ‘real’ conversation here that tries to come off as being natural is actually the one the physician should have with the patient, not a bunch of valley girl/sex in the city hybrid wannabes. (Even with additional comments added to the clip by the poster, the quality of the original spot shines through.)

Tags: Yaz