Following the loosening of TV advertising restrictions on pharmaceuticals, spots in that product category have since become prevalent, if not inescapable. And according to recent published reports, these commercials have helped create a greater consumer demand for specific medicines, causing a significant number of health professionals to deem such salesmanship often counterproductive to the well-being of patients.
On the flip side, some argue that making the public aware of certain pharmaceuticals empowers potential consumers to make informed choices about their healthcare. So it boils down to the question of whether the ads are creating unfounded demand for certain medicines or, instead, are generating more careful deliberation and awareness of the options.
Either answer only underscores the power of advertising in our daily lives. And like all power, it must be used wisely.
Late last year, NBC announced its decision to become the first major broadcast TV network to accept commercials for hard liquor in nearly 50 years. Some pointed to sagging ad revenues as being a motivating factor behind the move, prompting NBC to open up a new sector of business. And while ABC, CBS and FOX said they have no current plans to lift their self-imposed bans on hard liquor spots, it’s generally believed that those networks are at least looking to see how NBC fares before they consider the same leap.
NBC has set up guidelines for hard liquor commercials. They can only run in primetime between 9 p.m. and 11 p.m., or during late-night programs. The network opted, however, not to run any such ads during the Winter Olympics.
Also required per NBC policy is that hard liquor advertisers run four months of public service spots before being allowed to directly promote their products. After that, at least 20 percent of these advertisers’ spot inventory must consist of "socially responsible" public service messages.
But social responsibility should instead translate into such advertising not being on television at all, according to the American Medical Association, advocacy groups such as the Center for Science in the Public Interest, some vocal members of Congress, and at least one Federal Communications Commission commissioner.
A lower-profile group, the National Association of Governors’ Highway Safety Representatives (NAGHSR), reasoned that network ads could help reverse progress that has been made in recent years. A NAGHSR study released earlier this month concluded that states’ efforts to reduce underage drinking have been successful, as evidenced by increased public awareness of the problem, greater cooperation among state and local organizations, and decreases in alcohol use and alcohol-related vehicle crashes—and the injuries and fatalities they cause. According to the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration, the death rate in 2000 was the lowest ever recorded: nine fatalities per 100,000 youths.
NAGHSR chair Marsha Lembke said, "The states have made much progress in the area of underage drinking prevention efforts through a combination of educational and enforcement activities, but more work must be done."
Lembke contended that while states are on the right track, a variety of external factors—including the prospect of hard liquor advertising becoming acceptable and mainstream on broadcast television—makes the challenge of reducing underage drinking even greater. She expressed concern that hard liquor ads will be seen over time by a significant number of young TV viewers. Lembke also noted that a looming federal tax cut on beer could prove damaging.
"By themselves," related Lembke, "these factors [beer price cuts and hard liquor TV spots] may not seem so significant, but combined they are going to make our jobs even harder."
