The big idea: Pharma marketers should pivot away from TV advertising even if the government doesn’t implement a ban on D2C drug ads. That was our major takeaway after hearing Prompt CEO Paul Dyer’s keynote presentation at The Pharma PR & Comms Summit earlier this month.
Catch up quick: HHS Secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr. has advocated to ban drug ads on TV and radio, though he recently acknowledged that it will be difficult to execute due to free-speech protections. Still, there is bipartisan support for stricter drug ad regulations, and alternatives to an outright ban could include requiring drugmakers to disclose more side effects or pricing information, or eliminating pharma companies’ advertising tax deductions.
Dyer gave three key reasons why pharma marketers should already be preparing for alternative advertising strategies.
1. In the event a ban does occur (which we think is unlikely, though not impossible), drug brands that are too invested in traditional advertising will suffer financially.
- Dyer noted that AbbVie—notoriously a top spender on TV ads—recently lost billions in market value after a report surfaced of HHS exploring different ways to make D2C advertising tougher for drugmakers.
- He added that legal teams will sue the government in the event of a ban, which would be quite costly.
- And marketing teams would look into breaking contracts with media networks.
2. TV advertising isn’t delivering the ROI that it used to.
3. Many consumers feel overexposed to pharma ads.