I don't want to make too much of this, but Advertising Age is running real time stats -- on the "percentage of positive conversations" involving top 200 brand-mentions in social media (Twitter, StumbleUpon, etc.). I think Viagra®'s truly-amazing showing (70 percent positive!) reflects an obsession I'd rather not indulge.
So, to be fair, I've also included Claritin® and Ambien®, below.
Do go read it all, though.
Fascinating:
Brand % Positive No. of Conversations Ambien® 52.8% 4,350 Claritin® 39.1% 3,004 Gardasil® 16.9% 3,887 Viagra® 70.4% 24,023
Should Schering-Plough be concerned (with Claritin® firmly in negative territory)? I don't know. I guess drugs do poorly overall -- or so Ad Age claims (n.b. Viagra). . . .
I do think Merck ought to be concerned about Gardasil®, here -- as those are lots of conversations; and overwhelmingly negative conversations, at that.
As to Viagra's showing -- do that many old guys tweet? I guess so. [Or maybe their female counterparts do. . . hmmmm. I dunno.] Alternatively, it is possible, I guess that someone is paying for "astro-turfing" on that brand. How else is it so wildly out-of-line with other prescription meds -- and at eight-times as many conversations?
3 comments:
While Pfizer doesn't want to really talk about it, my guess is that all the 'buzz' is from the recreational users
Who really has this kind of time to spend on an endeavor that seems to be an absolute waste of time (in Tweeting about Viagra?) Honestly, grow up.
Thanks Anon. No. 2. . . Feel free to scroll on by. That is — you do you; I’ll do me.
Onward.
Post a Comment