How Pharma Can Get Social

The economy has prompted many business owners to think differently about how they reach and furnish valuable information to their customers. Social media has been at the forefront of this movement, providing a forum for customers and prospects of business, allowing them to help mold the shape of the business to conform to their needs. Never before has a business had the opportunity to get so much feedback so instantly.

The behemoth conspicuously absent from any direct interaction with their customers has been the pharmaceutical industry. The only real presence on the web is Johnson & Johnson’s “JNJ BTW,” a blog intended to reach out primarily to customers as a resource for information on a variety of topics, from the pure “business” aspects of Johnson & Johnson (such as acquisitions of new companies) to topics with a more personal appeal, such as child safety or health and wellness.

There is no direct to consumer (DTC) messages embedded in the blog. For that matter, there are no products mentioned at all in the articles I sampled, which is consistent with the cautionary approach many drug companies take when it comes to being social.

But Marc Monseau, editor of the Johnson & Johnson blog (also on Twitter, @JNJComm), notes the importance of not just watching the blogosphere and social media as it evolves, but becoming an active participant in the community in order to keep a hand on the pulse of their customers. As he states on the blog’s about page:

On JNJ BTW, there will be talk about Johnson & Johnson — what we are doing, how we are doing it and why. There will be comment on the news about our company and the industry — occasionally correcting any mistakes (not that that ever happens!) or simply providing more context. I hope and expect that some of my colleagues will eventually join me on this blog.

We may not always be able to talk about product-specific issues, news from our operating companies or issues that fall under regulatory or legal constraints. But we’re going to do what we can to talk openly, directly and to the best of our knowledge. I’m sure we will learn more as we blog, so keep in mind that nothing on JNJ BTW is set in stone.

Thinking Differently: More Interaction by Your Readers

Johnson & Johnson is on the right track with their blog but it’s time for them to look for ways to be more engaging with their readers. It doesn’t have to be complex; perhaps a polling system to find out what readers think about a particular topic, or maybe a way for readers to contribute to the content of the pages themselves would be good ways to draw more visitors.

On the biotech side, a new site that’s got a really good approach is, “What Can Biotech Do for You,” which is devoted entirely to answering questions on how biotechnology can help the consumer in a number of different areas. Sponsored by the Biotechnology Industry Organization (BIO), the intent is to create a social site that makes visitors feel as if they really are driving the direction of the content. And it isn’t just limited to blogging. IAmBiotech, appears in such social media outlets as Facebook and Twitter, increasing their reach and appeal to a growing number of people who not only benefit from biotech, but also who just might share an interest in this community and who want to be able to find one another more easily.

Just What the Doctor Ordered

In order to be successful using social media, Pharmaceutical companies shouldn't overthink legal issues. Social media and its accepted etiquette lend themselves nicely to what could be considered an orthodox model of interaction between Pharmaceutical companies and the consumer by FDA standards. Using social media as a tool to educate people in short bursts and status updates would keep information fresh, and would provide a series of resources people could follow and to which they could eventually connect. Lack of self-promotion means that DTC advertising would not only be something to avoid because of the scrutiny that could ensue from the FDA, but also because drug advertisements are just not something people would find palatable on a social network.

Some models that the pharmaceutical industry could potentially leverage to establish a more social presence:

• Establish an organization with competitors that can act as a source of information for all things in the pharmaceutical industry. Allow consumers to shape content, and create a voice for the site that speaks to more than just the consumer, but to the skeptic and the enthusiast alike. Answer questions about what the Pharmaceutical industry can do for them, much like web sites for Biotech already do.
• Create Twitter accounts that can serve as sources of information. In order to properly follow "fair balance" rules set for by the FDA, Pharmaceutical companies can’t provide a brand name product and the indications it treats without also advising of the risks of the medication.
  
• Blog. If nothing else, Pharmaceuticals should consider adopting Johnson & Johnson’s model of blogging and at least providing a better connection to their consumers. Consumers could have a direct method of providing valuable feedback that they couldn’t otherwise communicate.

Not all things will work for all products, and your target audience needs to be considered before launching a massive social media campaign. But with several million users on each social media outlet, there is significant opportunity to participate in a way that is consistent with the philosophy of providing quality content. When it comes to disease and treatment, the more information you can provide more quickly, the better you will be perceived by your customer.

Microsoft - The Go-To Entertainment Box in the Living Room

Xbox's announcement to offer Netflix six months ago via their new Xbox Experience, propelled them ahead in the digital-living-room strategy. By February, 1 million Xbox Live users had downloaded the application and streamed 1.5 billion minutes of TV and movie content from Netflix. That means about one-tenth of Netflix's 10 million subscribers have watched via Xbox 360.

Xbox users are used to using the console to connect to the web. Of the more than 28 million Xbox owners today, more than 17 million, or about 65%, pay for Live, or internet-connected, service, according to Microsoft. Since the launch of 360, more than $1 billion has been spent on Xbox Live, with no signs of slowing -- spending on Live was up 84% in 2008 vs. 2007.

And in a recent survey on online gamers, NPD Group found that half of those who use a console for online play use an Xbox; that's compared with 29% for Nintendo Wii and 20% for Sony PS3.

Since the Xbox 360 launched in late 2005, the company has pushed the box as more than just the next iteration of the already-popular Xbox online-connected video-game console. After a lot of marketing, new content and feature deals, and several price cuts -- the Xbox is delivering on its original promise as the go-to entertainment box in the living room.

The extension of the video-game box began with Xbox Live, which launched in 2002, a year after the original Xbox console bowed. That initial version promoted co-mingling gamer play and interactive experiences but was really gamer-focused. It was the Xbox 360 and the launch of the Xbox Live Marketplace -- with its virtual storefront of not only hard-core-gamer candy but also the Xbox Live Arcade, featuring lots of old-school and female-friendly downloadable games, video-game and movie trailers, plus full movie, TV and music-video downloads -- that expanded its base.

And where there are people, marketers aren't far behind. Microsoft will run more than 100 different ad campaigns on XBox Live in the 2009 fiscal year, which ends June 30.

Most recently, for example, Honda signed on as the sole sponsor of Xbox Live Primetime's "Play and Win" game show, which starts May 15. It's the first time the automaker has partnered with Xbox -- and incidentally, it's counting on reaching more than just young males.

Xbox is offering a great way to associate brands with a fun, engaging and entertaining campaign medium.

Has Home Come Home?

To state the obvious, over the past year, new media discussions have changed dramatically. We've gone from talking about seizing opportunities and exploring new platforms and emerging media to simply surviving from day to day. All it took was a little worldwide economic crisis to redefine our business priorities.

Case in point, in the July 2007 Sony's announcement, virtual worlds like Linden Lab's Second Life and mtv's Laguna Beach were growing in popularity with audiences, including curious advertisers seeking to create unique, branded engagements beyond the typical marketing vehicles. Although full of potential, these virtual worlds weren't without issue and, as a result, advertisers sat in a wait-and-see mode for fear that the platform could backfire. In contrast, when Sony shared the vision of Home (part of its "Gaming 3.0" strategy), Sony's strategy uniquely addressed key issues that others had yet to resolve. It provided a true value to its target community, and an exponentially better user experience that was to be tightly integrated into Sony's PlayStation 3 gaming system.

It was also clear that Sony had planned for advertisers to be a big part of Home's experience and growth. These considerations could be seen in Home's environments, the interaction capabilities of the platform, and Sony's clear attempt to create a brand-friendly world that major brands would find more comfortable than other virtual worlds, thus creating expanded revenue opportunities for Sony, and engagement opportunities for advertisers.

To the dismay of many PS3 owners, it took Sony more than 14 months longer than expected to release the first open-beta of the Home experience. Many went from saying "This is going to be huge," to "This thing may never come out."

Well... Good things come to those who wait. Home entertaining, visually stunning and rich with features, It also engages visitors for long periods of time (hours, not minutes) - one of the longtime benefits of, and interest in, video games and gamers.

It has integrated advertising into the environments, similarly to the real world, just without the physical or technological limitations. For instance, when hanging out in Central Plaza, visitors can watch movie trailers on a massive video wall complete with 3-D sound.

Beyond virtual billboards, the real potential lies in the ability for brands to become part of the world itself. Red Bull, a brand taking part in the beta, has built an island surrounded by pristine water and giant rock formations resembling those found off the coast of Vietnam. Visitors can interact with other Home residents, step up to a Red Bull bar, or take part in a fully branded Air Race game, a sport Red Bull actively sponsors in real life. Players race their planes above the island and out over the ocean while blazing through rings and banking around pylons, all while exposed to and interacting with the Red Bull brand.

Of course, the potential of Home's value to advertisers is only as big as the PlayStation 3 install base (20 million units worldwide), which is still far behind that of XBox and Wii.

What does that mean for Home? As of early January, less than 30 full days into the open-beta, users downloaded the Home software 3.4 million times and had already purchased more than $1 million worth of virtual goods. Not a lot of money, but a good indication of what could come.

Certainly Home - and virtual worlds in general - aren't right for every brand, especially in a challenged economy. And in its current beta form, the world is rather small. But for those interested in exploring its potential may just find there's no place like Home.

Kia, Microsoft To Promote Soul On Xbox

Kia is reaching out to younger consumers and gamers with a plan to promote the new Soul via a video game marketing program with Xbox 360 and Xbox LIVE. The effort includes a national sweepstakes on the two platforms and on Xbox 360 titles and dangles a new Soul and a VIP, all-expenses-paid trip to Los Angeles to attend the best of the 2009 Electronic Entertainment Expo (E3) on June 2.

Gamers can enter to participate in the promotion at Xbox.com/Kia or on Xbox LIVE Marketplace until the end of the month. People can also enter via texting on mobile phones to their Gamertag.

Kia is offering other prizes like a home entertainment system with a 47-inch HDTV, Xbox 360 Elite console, a one-year subscription of Xbox LIVE Gold, 120GB Zune and a one-year Zune Pass.

In June, Kia will extend the initiative with sponsorship of E3 on Xbox LIVE. The automaker, which is also official auto sponsor of the NBA, will sponsor Xbox's NBA Live 09 timed with the NBA Finals in June. Microsoft will expedite ROI research via Microsoft Advertising.

Kia's tagline in the U.S. is "The Power to Surprise," but the Soul has its own theme line, "A New Way to Roll."

Kia Motors America was a rare bright spot in the business last month, with first-quarter sales up 1 percent versus the first quarter last year. By the end of last month, the company had sold 1,246 Souls, which began rolling into dealerships in February.

Whether Kia succeeds in wooing younger buyers is another question. Wes Brown, auto consultant with Iceology in L.A., says the company stands a chance both with the vehicle itself and with the quirky ad campaign, in which the Soul is posited as an escape from the hamster wheel. Literally.

"I think the vehicle is cool -- I think the launch campaign definitely makes you sit there and go 'what the heck is this all about?' It's a clever approach and arguably, the shape of the vehicle, which is what Toyota's Scion division tried with the xB and Nissan will do with the Cube, is right for Gen X and Y."

According to J.D. Power and Associates' Power Information Network, Scion has the youngest customers. The average age of Scion vehicle buyers is 42. Mazda is next at 43. Then come Mitsubishi, Land Rover, Audi, VW and BMW's Mini brand. Kia, whose average customer age is 51, per J.D. Power, is well down the list at No. 28 -- behind its affiliate Hyundai and just in front of Lexus and only eight slots from Buick, with the oldest buyers at 62.

Brown says the vehicle must transcend the parent brand and the consumer perception that "this is a cheap, inexpensive vehicle. But the focus on personalization definitely ties in strongly with what Gen Y wants: that it's a blank sheet of paper waiting for people to put their expression on it."

GTA's Goes Against the Grain

Take-Two has made one of the best-reviewed games ever for the Nintendo DS and no one seems to care. Why? Because there's a major disconnect here. Take-Two's "Grand Theft Auto: Chinatown Wars," the newest game in the franchise, was released a month ago for the Nintendo DS. According to numbers released yesterday, the game has sold under 90,000 units. For anyone unaware of the nuances of game sales figures, let me translate: the game flopped. Big-time.

What's interesting has been the commentary about why it's flopped. Most are saying it was remiss to release a "GTA" game on a platform primarily targeted at children. Possibly... Imagine for a moment that McDonald's were to start serving the most incredible escargot, which all the tasters considered to be one of the best in the country. That meal might just tank, purely because the brand characteristics of McDonald's are nearly the exact opposite of an expensive delicacy. That's what I suspect is going on here. The fans of the "GTA" series love the open world, the ever increasingly realistic graphics and portrayal of a vivid, breathing city. The series is one of edgy races, high quality writing, and fast-paced shooting action. The Nintendo DS is a system that offers innovative gameplay for light-fare, portable gaming. These two are not a natural fit.

Had Take-Two dropped the first three letters of the game's name, the title wouldn't have been so easily dismissed by consumers. If the company had built up fresh expectations rather than adopting existing expectations, a different story may have unfolded. The DS release was further injured by the lack of a real ability to demo the game, something that would have further helped to cement purchase confidence. It's possible that continued sales of the DSi will remedy that for future titles.

While the the take-away from this release will be that going against the grain isn't a wise decision, the issue may be much more circumstantial than a broad issue of conformity. It's upsetting that the industry has become so comfortable with pigeonholing itself into the "casual" and "core" buckets. When will that change?

Measuring ROI in Social Media

Package-Goods Brand Earns $1.28 Million in Sales for every $1 Million Social-Media Campaign

Package-goods brands are still cautious about social media, figuring that the return on investment can't be accurately measured. After all, marketing on Facebook or MySpace might generate a conversation but not necessarily a sale. Now, however, a method is emerging to relate one to the other, potentially eliminating a major impediment.

What it Reaped

MySpace marketing ROI for unnamed personal-care brand: Total consumers exposed: 76.9M Percentage of internet population: 40% Total impressions: 1.1B Media outlay: $1M Offline sales generated from campaign: $1.28M Sources: ComScore, MySpace, Dunnhumby

Recent research from ComScore, MySpace and Dunnhumby presented at the Advertising Research Foundation's Re:Think 2009 conference in late March suggests that even relatively small outlays on social networks by package-goods brands can result in offline sales impact and deliver positive return on investment.

Generally, the ROI tool of choice for consumer package goods -- marketing-mix models that rely on econometric analysis of changes in retail scanner data -- can't pick up the impact of the relatively small five- and six-figure outlays package-goods brands make on digital media.

To overcome that, MySpace teamed with ComScore, which uses a panel of more than 1 million people in the U.S. to track internet usage, and Dunnhumby, which runs loyalty programs for supermarket retailers and has access to loyalty-card purchase data from 59 million people in the U.S. The two panels include 60,000 people who are part of both databases, creating a single-source database that allows a definitive look at how internet ads affect offline purchases.

ComScore Chairman Gian Fulgoni last year approached fellow Information Resources Inc. veteran John LaRocca, VP-U.S. insights at Dunnhumby -- which runs the loyalty program for supermarket heavyweight Kroger Co., among others -- about combining efforts to measure digital campaigns.

Measuring Sales
One of the first studies was for an unnamed personal-care brand that ran a $1 million campaign on MySpace last year, including a contest in which members submitted videos of themselves and friends for others in the network to vote on, said Heidi Browning, VP-client solutions at MySpace. The program also included online couponing.

By the standards marketers sometimes use to measure digital-ad effectiveness, the MySpace effort wasn't overwhelming. Of 76.9 million people exposed to the campaign in four months, as estimated by ComScore, only 765,000, or fewer than 1%, visited an advertiser page on MySpace, though roughly half who did (358,000) visited the advertiser's website.

But by the measure that matters most, sales, the campaign appeared to pay off nicely. It produced $1.28 million in offline sales, as measured by Dunnhumby, which compared purchases among shoppers not exposed to the campaign with purchases among those who were. That amounted to a 28% return on investment, not counting returns from repeat sales among consumers the brand won via the campaign. Only about 17% of the sales were of products advertised in the campaign; the rest of the sales lift went to the parent brand, in what's frequently called the "halo effect."

Particularly by package-goods standards, that $1 million digital outlay with one site was large. But Dunnhumby has run similar studies with smaller digital campaigns.

Promising Method
While a campaign that reaches nearly 77 million people is certainly large enough to generate a read in marketing-mix models, the combination of the ComScore and Dunnhumby panels into a single-source database -- assuming the numbers are correct -- holds promise for more-accurately measuring many smaller efforts. The bigger question is whether the ROI will hold up for bigger efforts, justifying budgets similar to what consumer-package-goods brands spend on TV and magazines. Digital is incredibly efficient, because the cost per thousand is low.

So, Wii Games Sell... But Are They Good?

The Nintendo Wii is an odd duck
It's innovative but low-tech; it's accessible for gamers, but difficult to nail from a game design perspective; it has a large install base, but one that has proven tough for third-parties to crack.

Electronic Entertainment Design and Research analyst Jesse Divnich asks again: If your videogame-illiterate (and ficticious) Aunt Sheila walked into a store and bought you a Wii game, what are the chances that it would be a quality title?


From the Wii's launch through 2008, four percent of Wii games, or 12 games, have rated over 85 percent on average. Fifty-four percent of Wii games, or 155 titles, have rated below 65 percent. This rate compares less favorably to the Xbox 360's and PS3's libraries, which laid claim to 48 and 36 85 percent-plus games, respectively.

There may be a few explanations for the Wii's lower marks. First, the hardware is fundamentally more accessible for game makers. It lowers the barrier for game development, but at the same time allows for more lower-quality games to crowd the shelves, typically from studios looking to make a quick buck on the back of the Wii's wild success. This dilutes the library.

Secondly, developers, even the ones with strong track records, have had a considerable learning curve in Wii development. Sure, programming a game isn't as complicated as the Xbox 360 or PS3, but dialing in strong game mechanics that play to the Wii Remote's motion-sensing features and resonate with the Wii's audience (and game reviewers) is difficult. Even Nintendo of America boss Reggie Fils-Aime recently suggested that third parties don't quite "get it" when it comes to Wii development. They didn't "get" the DS when it first came out, but they caught on, eventually.

Lastly, the old chestnut of whether or not game reviews really matter is perhaps most interesting when talking about a product like the Wii and its software. This is essentially a casual-focused device aimed at a wide demographic, many of whom wouldn't know the difference between Edge the magazine and The Edge from U2.

How does EEDAR handle review scores?
Review scores are one of the ways that the videogame industry judges the success of game titles. While EEDAR does not issue game reviews itself, it does factor review scores into many of its analysis and informational services. The EEDAR review score is a composite score, based on critic reviews from various videogame magazines and websites. This composite score allows EEDAR to show critical consensus at a glance.

EEDAR review scores range from 0 to 100, with higher scores indicating superior and lower scores indicating less favorable critic reviews. EEDAR converts all review scores to a 100 point score. Examples of this are:

• Games on a 10 point scale (Example: A game with a rating of 8/10 is converted to an 8)
• Games on a 10 + decimal point score (Example: A game with a rating of 8.2/10 is converted to an 8)
• Games on a 4 or 5 point scale, with the possibility of a decimal point (Example: A game with a rating of 4.5 is converted to a 90)
• Games with a letter grade (Example: A game with a rating of B+ is converted to an 82 (explanation below)

How are letter grade to number conversions done?
EEDAR does not use the standard scholastic “letter to number” conversion for review scores. For example, with a scholastic system, a B- is the equivalent of an 80, while a D+ is a 68.

With game reviews, using a scholastic “letter to number” conversion results in letter grades being converted to disproportionately high numeric review scores. For example, with games whose numeric review scores are in the 40 to 50 range on a 100 point scale, receiving a D+ on the scholastic scale would give that game a review score of 60, a number 10 to 20 points higher than the other review scores. Similarly, games with review scores of 70 to 80 usually corresponds with letter review scores of B, not C.

The intent is to have the converted point value of letter grades be similar in scope to the numeric review scores received by the game. After examining thousands of review scores, EEDAR uses the following letter to number conversion scale:

A+	100	C	58
A	94	C-	52
A-	88	D+	45
B+	82	D	38
B	76	D-	31
B-	70	F+	24
C+	64	F	17

How Gestures Change Digital Experiences

Tap. Flick. Fling. Slide. Spin. Pinch. Welcome to the new, refreshingly human language of digital experiences.

As anyone who has bowled a few frames on a Nintendo Wii or flicked through a series of pictures on an Apple iPhone knows, gestural and multitouch interfaces are a thrilling and surprisingly intuitive way to interact with technology. And once consumers get used to ditching the mouse and keyboard they are going to demand much, much more of it.

But will brand marketers be ready? With recall rates at an all-time low, they can't afford not to be. The technology, which is built on accelerometers, sensors and the like, is finally ready for the mainstream. And it just might be what the industry needs to start delivering the breakthrough brand creative that we've all been clamoring for.

To understand what's possible, to see how brands can and will behave, it helps to take a look at what's worked so far:

CNN: Any discussion of gestural interfaces needs to start with Jeff Hahn and CNN. Hahn, founder of Perceptive Pixel, introduced multitouch to the mainstream with his talk at the TED conference in 2006. CNN tapped his agency to create John King's multitouch screen on CNN for the presidential election, which made the broadcasts historical for more than one reason.

AT&T: AT&T was one of the early adopters of multitouch, making Microsoft's Surface table an integral part of the company's future mobile retail experience. Now, in select locations, consumers are able to place various phones on the table, compare features, browse rate plans and explore coverage areas by simply sliding their fingers across the screen.

Orange: Searching for an exciting new way to engage consumers, Orange looked to U.K. ad shop The Alternative to create a gesture-based and "touch free" interactive shop window. The window is activated when the shop is closed and lets passers-by check news, watch music videos or film trailers and play games -- all by waving their hands.

Levi's: Dockers recently made news by creating a "shakable" mobile advertisement that is presented within an iPhone application. The ad, which gets served as you progress through levels on games like iBowl and iGolf, allows the user to literally shake the phone to make a dancer wearing Docker's khakis to dance -- clearly this gives interactive advertising a whole new meaning.

Boxee: The much talked about tech start-up is creating a slick, new internet-based online video viewing experience and is trying to differentiate by tapping both gestures and multitouch for its just released controller -- an ingenious little application that turns your iPhone or iPod touch into a fully functioning remote control.

Siftables: Going even further afield, there are a whole new set of gestural computing technologies that are close to production. Siftables, born out of the MIT Media Lab, caused a stir at TED this year by making digital data physical with cookie-sized devices that look like children's blocks. Users can manipulate them, whether by piling, grouping or sorting them, to create different applications. Now being stewarded by Taco Labs, you can expect to see these put into play soon.

We are still just scratching the surface here. More multitouch is on the way (Microsoft is making multitouch a core part of Windows 7) and just as technology companies are rushing to build new platforms and devices to support gestures, brands need to move quickly as well. Few, surprisingly, have done so beyond the occasional one-off or prototype so far.

There is much for us all to still learn about gestural computing. And there will definitely be a few things to avoid -- substituting "Tap Here" for "Click Here" must be on the top of any "don't list" worth its salt.

One thing is certain, however: Gestural experiences will become our digital future. They will enable us to create rich, memorable experiences and engage consumers in ways that we can't yet even conceive. These experiences will define some brands, and become transformational for others. And very soon, what gets created beyond the browser will matter just as much as what we can create within it.