Big pharma lessons in the media mix

The recent tussle over an FDA bill which could have restricted some direct-to-consumer advertising from pharmaceutical companies has a lesson, buried within, for local hospitals or health awareness campaigns. WSJ reports that of $5.3 billion in pharma ads in 2006, 55% was spent on TV, 36% on magazine, 4% on newspaper, and only 2% on radio and outdoor.

We find this interesting because regional hospitals often spend heavily on TV during branding campaigns, and then go deep into outdoor and local newsprint ... while not touching magazines. Pharma loves glossy print. Local hospitals don't. What gives?

Pharma marketers are smart. They pick TV because older demos "over index" on heavy TV consumption, and diseases are a function of age. They pick magazines because of all media categories, women -- who make the majority of healthcare decisions around the home -- over index on magazines. If you work in health care communications and don't have magazines in your plan, it's worth revisiting -- you could test glossies with unique 800 numbers, zone the buy in tight geographies without going national, and potentially have a new home run in your media plan.

And as for the old, old argument from some hospital execs who say advertising doesn't work in influencing physician referral patterns, we say this: Ask pharma why they spent $5.3 billion last year talking to consumers. And then ask your doctor.