Direct-To-Consumer Advertising Ethics

Ads for pharmaceutical drugs are everywhere. They are in magazines, on television and radio, on billboards, and on the little bags that you get from the pharmacist. These days it is difficult to get away from all the drug advertising. All these ads are for products that require a doctor's prescription. The goal of advertising is to increase profits. By advertising so heavily for drugs that the majority of the population does not need, pharmaceutical companies attempt to create as large a consumer base as they can. In advertising directly to the consumer, the drug companies accomplish two objectives. First, they get information directly to the consumer. Second, they promote the product and

Despite this, the industry did not alter its ways, maintaining that its ad campaigns were "educational," and that people were able to make their own decisions about what they purchased (Payer 66). However, it is evident that the advertisements produced by the pharmaceutical industry are designed for the very purpose of making it difficult for people to make these decisions independently. This marketing produces a large number of often deceptive, misleading tactics which have a large influence on both consumers and medical practitioners. The chief beneficiaries of this marketing are not the consumers but the pharmaceutical companies themselves.

There are proponents of DTC prescription drug ads. They argue that “the ads inform patients about diseases and possible treatments, encourage people to seek medical advice, help remove stigma associated with medical conditions, and provide needed sales revenue to fund costly research and development (R&D) of new drugs (Drug Ads ProCon.org).” On the flip side opponents argue “that DTC drug ads misinform patients, promote drugs before long-term safety-profiles can be known, medicalize and stigmatize normal conditions and bodily functions like wrinkles and low testosterone, waste valuable medical appointment time, and have led to our society’s overuse of prescription drugs (Drug Ads ProCon.org).”

New Zealand is the only other developed nation in the world where prescription drugs are advertised directly to consumers. The American pharmaceutical industry used to abide by a term “ethical marketing,” meaning that drug companies could only market to physicians. On the other hand, there is a valid argument for allowing direct-to-consumer drug advertisements as the flow of information and transparency are beneficial. However, there obviously needs to be some checks and balances. This experiment began with a print advertisement in 1981 in Reader’s Digest and the first TV ad took place in 1983. At that time, the FDA had several rules in place requiring companies to offer a fair and balanced presentation. In sum, this was a responsible era of advertising.

The fact that the United States and New Zealand are the only two countries in the world that allow pharmaceutical companies to advertise directly to consumers is unreal to me. Through the Division of Drug Marketing, Advertising, and Communication (DDMAC), the FDA guarantee that all prescription drug promotion provides truthful, balanced, and accurate information (FDA, 2010); alongside with the risk the drug has to

     Is a patient at liberty to diagnose his or her own affliction? If so, are they also qualified enough to know the right medication and take into consideration the drugs adverse effects? With the recent onset of direct to consumer advertising for prescription drugs, this is becoming the case. In 1994, expenditures on direct to consumer advertisements were about twenty-five-million a year. By 1998 that figure changed to about 225 million (Sasich 2). Turn on the TV, there they are. Open your favorite magazine, there they are again. Listen to the radio, congratulations, you’ve found another ad for the latest prescription drug. Rush down to your local

Advertisements have one primary purpose that is to persuade. Prescription medications Ads tell the consumers to get treatment and also imply that they have the need for it to solve their problems. Since prescription Ads have been introduced, the pharmaceutical

Everyday, everywhere we are being inundated with advertisements. Whether it be while you are walking down the street, shopping at the supermarket, or even in the safety of your own home enjoying some tv in your down time. Advertising, whether it be big or small is everywhere; and in fact there are many issues with it. Advertising that promotes a service or product in a deceptive way is highly unethical. This is because it doesn’t provide the customer with enough information that they need in order to make a good, educated decision. And on another note, advertising is manipulative because of the way it promotes consumption at such a large scale. Some of the main reasons for advertising being dishonest are because it displays false savings, it exhibits unnecessary upselling and possibly most importantly, it feul’s wasteful consumerism. The significance of this problem, comes in the form of the large sums of money people waste on products they don’t need and once purchased, realise they don’t want. Frankly it is just too overt to look past.

Each day we are bombarded with advertisements from a plethora of corporations in every waking moment of our lives. Advertising agencies have become so advanced at what they do, that often times we may not even realize we are being advertised a product. This raises an interesting ethical dilemma over a certain type of advertising: persuasive advertising. Philosophers, economists, and business professionals have debated over whether or not persuasive advertising is an immoral violation of the autonomy of consumers. While not all forms of advertising are in and of themselves certainly immoral, persuasive advertising is particularly reprehensible due to the fact that not only does it manipulate our unconscious desires of which we are completely unaware in order to sell a product, but it also routinely leads us to act against our own best interest, thus overriding our autonomy.

Think about how often you are watching your favorite show on television and all of a sudden you are interrupted by a commercial. The commercial begins with the following words, “Do you suffer with …” and this question follows with the following sentence, “if so, then talk to your doctor about … (the name of the medication that is being advertised)”. These prescription drug advertisements are being shown all over the United States multiple times a day. It is these advertisements that are used for publicity and marketing that are affecting Americans. The majority of Americans engage in watching television. The prescription drug advertisements do have a positive impact on Americans but, these advertisements do more harm than good.

Utilitarianism focuses more on the consequences of an action. Using this method, if an action "produces the greatest amount of good for the greatest number," the action is ethical. Pharmaceutical companies should perform a cost-benefit analysis to assess the effects of a certain drug and/or decision. After this assessment, drug companies should choose the option that produces the greatest amount of good. By following this method, sometimes an action may not seem ethical at first, but utilitarianism focuses more on the end result, and this is what pharmaceutical companies usually use to determine how to react to a certain situation.

What facts would you want to know before making a judgement on the ethical appropriateness of direct consumer advertising of drugs?

Now the wind of technological advancement is blowing all around the glob. Our life become so much easy and comfortable. For the sake of explosion of new technology, media, and new opportunities is transforming the marketing and advertising landscape and revolutionizing the way the industry conducts business. The only fact is the transparency that is needed. For the sake of motivating advertising, public relations, and marketing communications professionals to practice the highest personal ethics in the creation and distribution of commercial information to consumers the institute for advertising (IAE) was created.

In this technology based era ridden with deregulation, advertising has become an increasingly ‘hot-topic.’ Advertising helps consumers with buying decisions, boosts economic growth, and creates numerous job opportunities. However, there is one ingredient within advertisements which is often overthrown for status and economic gain; ethics. For example, in 2009, The FDA mentions Cheerios is branded in a way which makes its cereal “sound like a drug to prevent, mitigate, and treat high cholesterol and heart disease.” (“FDA Warns Cheerios on Health Claims.” WebMD, n.d. Web. 12 Oct. 2016) According to the FDA, Cheerios’ advertising inappropriately highlights the ‘fantastical’ benefits of its cereal. Due to this, Cheerios was forced to spend millions re-designing and re-branding its products. The absence of ethics is most rampant regarding tobacco advertisements. They offer seductive cues, subjective product descriptions, and minimal information on their products. Thus, nearly 443,000 people die prematurely each year from smoking. Tobacco products should not be advertised upon, as these advertisements explore a plethora unethical values.

Advertising is the indispensable way a brand promotes itself, but the imperative way to do this is in an ethical way. It is essential to reach out to the audience in a way, which doesn’t hurt their feelings or get to them in a negative way. When a commercial gets a negative review it eventually gets banned from being aired, as the viewers find it ‘offensive’ or have their very plausible reasons for it and moreover the main essence of the ad has vanished.