Up until now, the AZ Daily Star reports, pharmaceutical firms were given a rare exception on Facebook: they didn’t have to offer a wall. And why wouldn’t they want a wall? They’re afraid of their own product:
The industry “nightmare” is processing of adverse event reports (AERs), said Joe Farris, co-founder of the Digital Health Coalition, a nonprofit group focused on online marketing of health-care products. Users might write on a company’s Wall about a specific product causing an unexpected reaction or injury. That information could qualify as an AER, and it must then be filed with the Food and Drug Administration, which uses the reports to monitor product safety.
But not anymore — they’re being forced to open up. Talking about fun ways to get high with pills is also a concern, of course, but dodging legitimate AERs is a little ominous. Facebook pages don’t just allow helpful discussion among people with similar afflictions, but could act as a check against less-than-exhaustive FDA testing. Which is a good thing for everyone other than pharmaceutical shareholders.
Companies like Pfizer are extremely upfront about their paranoia, and warn you of comment deletion as soon as you land on their FB page. The top two reasons for pulling comments, they say?
Your comment references a Product (ours or someone else’s)
Your comment references a Side Effect
Maybe I just haven’t taken my effective Pfizer product of choice today, but can anyone else think of a reason why you’d go to Pfizer’s Facebook discussion page if not to talk about one of Pfizer’s products? What else is it there for? Fantasy football strategy? Anime debates? It’s silly to provide patients with a tool, and at the same time neuter that tool. They might as well just take the pages down entirely. [AZ Daily Star]
Photo: ajt/Shutterstock
EckyThump
Wednesday, August 17, 2011 at 10:11 AMI usually don’t have much time for ‘Facebook’ but if they can keep pharmaceutical companies honest, then that suits me fine! They’ve been pissing on their Guinea p… I mean customers for way too long! #]
Shiromasa Yamamoto
Wednesday, August 17, 2011 at 10:59 AMThe real issues most people have today about privacy is the amount of information these sites are collecting about its users, the way this information is being collected, and how this information is being used. With all this information social networking sites today have about it’s users, add a real name, add an email, and add facial recognition, not only do people loose their privacy, they also expose themselves to cyber crimes, and predatory advertising & manipulation, etc., Regardless of what sites today promise regarding security, any site can be hacked. An example would the government & banks who have so called state of the art security systems. Social networking sites such as Google+ & Facebook are open door gold mines for cyber criminals. The obvious solution to address these security problems is simple, no real names, no emails. You don’t need a real name and an email address to social network effectively yet with some anonymity, you need this information to sell to advertisers & companies, you also need this information to sell someday to private interest, governments, companies, etc.,Although only 20% complete and still in Beta, ONLYMEWORLD early on seems to realize that respecting its users Privacy Rights is paramount to both longevity & success in the industry. Their platform is similiar to Facebook, Google+, Twitter, and Linkedin, yet differ because of their approach to privacy by not asking for real names, and email addresses. ONLYMEWORLD, does not have nor will it ever have Facial Recognition Software!
Mike
Wednesday, August 17, 2011 at 11:20 AMtldr
EckyThump
Wednesday, August 17, 2011 at 1:13 PMHeh, I had to look that up, but yeah! #]