DTC Television Fading? I Doubt it.
? |
|
?Those who predict the end of television will be wrong.? |
The New York Times ran an article on its website on 2/2/12 with the headline ?Drug Makers Dial Down DTC Advertising.? The article says spending on television is down 20% since 2007. The reporter, Bruce Japsen, says ?analysts attribute part of the decline to controversy over such ads.? He says that analysts expect further declines with patent expirations for branded drugs.
My information from last year ending September provided by Nielsen shows spending is up 2% on television. Mr. Japsen cited Nielsen as his source for the decline in television so it is baffling somewhat since our numbers do not agree. It is possible he had a peak at full year 2011 that I did not see.
As I have said in prior columns, DTC spending appears to have reached a stable level. Whether it is plus 5% or minus 5% in any year depends on the new brands entering versus the older brands going off patent. Most new brands are using television at high levels along with print, point of care, radio, direct, and Internet. I have had no industry source tell me they are not planning using television for launches for potential blockbuster drugs. It is true that very gradually companies are adopting more targeted media and television is very slowly becoming a smaller part of the media mix.
DTC did peak a few years ago. That was because we had multiple brands on patent in key categories. As we lost those brands we lost spending. We peaked at about $5 billion spending and now we are at about $4 billion. Television is down from its peak as is print.
I have not heard any insider tell me that controversy is the reason they would reduce DTC. I am sure some CEOs have considered that as a reason to cut spending. To my knowledge, however, no major brand has said they are cutting DTC due to controversy. Let?s be real here. No matter what drug companies do in terms of advertising, the critics will scream. If DTC is dropped, then they will attack price, detailing, clinical study practices, sampling, testing on animals, patent protection, and other practices they find offensive. I think drug companies are realizing that they cannot placate the critics who see drug makers as a problem rather than a solution.
I think many health writers would love to see DTC phased out and are particularly against television. Somehow these writers find television advertising of drugs offensive. They think it taints the system and reduces objectivity of doctors. They forget that many things influence what gets prescribed. Do they really think PBM?s and Managed Care always want what is best for the patient? Does government want what is best or what costs less? There is subjectivity in all constituents of the health care system. Drug companies try to influence patients and providers. I will admit that. They provide information reviewed by FDA in the form of an ad. How horrible is that? Most providers make prescribing decisions based on many competing factors from subjective and objective sources. Television ads are just one such source and patients and providers are smart enough to know advertising is subjective.
Television spending could grow dramatically as drug companies increase disease education ads. Government will be looking to increase prevention programs and drug companies will actively advertise their drug categories in response. Those who predict the end of DTC television will be wrong at least for a decade or two. In fact, I will predict an increase in all DTC spending including television. DTC works and despite the criticism, patients benefit from the awareness of new treatments.
Bob Ehrlich, Chairman
DTC Perspectives, Inc
Comments are closed.