Stand Up for CafePharma's Right to Say "Piss Off!"

CafePharma faces a dilemma: should it hand over names of anonymous posters to the House Committee on Commerce, which requested these names as part of its investigation of "who knew what when" in the ENHANCE investigation? Or should CafePharma tell the committee to "piss off!"?

The Committee sent a letter to Sarah Palmer, CafePharma's Webmaster/mistress, and her ISP asking for the names, addresses, phone numbers, e-mail addresses, and Internet protocol addresses of anyone creating posts prior to January 18, 2008 regarding the ENHANCE clinical trial.

It also requested that CafePharma "not destroy, dispose of, or tamper with any files or records relating to Merck/Schering-Plough and the ENHANCE study."

I am not sure what legal rights CafePharma has to refuse to comply, but this request is a serious issue for CafePharma and other "social network" Web sites whose members depend upon the owners to protect their anonymity in the exercise of their free speech rights.

I am not telling CafePharma what to do, but I think anyone who owns a blog or social network that publishes "anonymous" comments should speak up against this request. It's one thing if the information was required for national security or if the postings were death threats, but it's quite another when we are talking about insider trading.

I propose that the Pharma Blogosphere community draft a letter to John Dingell, Chairman of the House Committee on Commerce, protesting the committee's request and defending the right of CafePharma to refuse to hand over private information about its members. Please join the discussion on the Pharma Marketing Network Forum I set up to get some input in creating this letter. Or send me an email: johnmack@virsci.com

Big Pharma, "Real" People, Wonkers?

Ed Silverman over at Pharmalot is trying to draw out the anonymous creators of a Website called BigPharmaRealPeople and challenged the principal--one Scott McTavish (aka John Galt)--to a blogging duel:

"One other thing, Scott. Since you chose not to answer any of our messages directly, we are still curious to know more about your background and those of your ’staff.’ We would also like to know what, if any, sponsorship or backing you may have. If you really do enjoy an open debate about all the facts, more disclosure would be helpful - unless your site is merely an example of astroturfing dressed up as a social networking experiment." (See "Big Pharma, Real People, Bitter Web Site").

I can't imagine that this site gets any pharma sponsorship money. If it did, it could afford to be sure that its web site was compatible with every browser out there, especially FireFox. It's not.

When I access the site using FireFox 5.0 for Windows, it's a mess!

I first heard of BigPharmaRealPeople from the Pharma Fraud blog (see "Big Pharma: Real (Phony) People"), which believed it was a spoof site. Frankly, I don't think there's much about it to get worked up about.

However, I find it amusing that perhaps the site took an idea I had and ran with it. Namely, the idea that the stories of "real" people working at pharmaceutical companies are not getting out. I suggested, for example, that the J&J people over at JNJ BTW should let their rank and file people tell their stories on that blog (see, for example, "Advice to All Pharma PR Bloggers Out There").

Could it be that a rogue person within J&J read my blog and decided to do what I suggested? Could be (I think Pharma Fraud believes it could be). Except BigPharmaRealPeople takes it a step further and potty mouths critics of the pharmaceutical industry, choosing to focus on "negative attack ads" rather than positive personal stories, which makes it sound more like someone from Cafe Pharma is behind this.

BigPharmaRealPeople is NOTHING like the open and frank style of JNJ BTW, but is very SIMILAR to attack dog style of Drug Wonks, who are also big Ayn Rand fans. It wouldn't surprise me, therefore, it those people were behind BigPharmaRealPeople!

Hmmm...Ah! I Love the Smell of Pharma Blogosphere in the Morning!

"What do you know about surfing major? You're from goddamn New Jersey!"

We former New Yorkers living in the Philly area get a kick out locals who brag about "going down the shore," by which they mean the New Jersey shore. When we say the beaches in New York are better than those in Jersey, they stare at us blankly and exclaim, "New York has beaches?" Duh!

New York or New Jersey, surfing there sucks!

But I love surfing here in the Pharma Blogosphere, especially in the morning!

First, I look over there in the right hand to see what's going on at Pharma Marketing Blog and Pharma Marketing podcastville.

At Pharma Marketing Blog, for example, you can Meet Dr. Andree Bates, Marketing ROI Expert. Dr. Bates' glamour shot appears on the left.

Then I try CafePharma's Pharmagather, which tells who has posted what most recently. Sometimes, however, this unnerves me because I get the urge to respond to the first item on the list although it may not be the best.

That's when I switch to PharmaCentral PageFlake, where I can browse through many posts on a blog-by-blog basis rather than on a FILO basis the way Pharmagather is set up.

My personal favorite blogs are arranged alphabetically in the Inner Planet list on the right. I go to that list when I want to check up on a specific blog.

Anyway, that's my morning routine in case you were interested!

It Must be a Slow Summer for Whistleblowers if the Best You Can Do is Cite CafePharma Discussions!

It must be a slow summer for whistleblowers when the best source of insider information you can muster are posts on CafePharma!

Peter Rost -- chief pharma whistleblower and blogger other bloggers love to link to and be linked from -- includes a couple of "insights" picked up from Cafepharma and easily overblows the significance of same.

His latest posts attempt to put Novartis in the hot seat (e.g., "Novartis - HR from Hell?" and "Novartis - The next whistleblower story?").

Rost merely offers links to Cafepharma discussion threads, including "Another Lawsuit Employment Retaliation Complain (sic)", which starts off promising enough:

"David Olagunju v. Novartis Pharmaceuticals Corporation

"Employment retaliation complaint stating plaintiff was terminated for refusing to alter safety data from the clinical trials for the drug Tasigna and for objecting to exaggerated reports on the drug. Paid download"

Several Cafepharma posters asked "Where can I get more info re: this case? Thanks!" and "How or what URL do I need to review this case.....does the FDA have wind of this????" All went unanswered as of this writing.

You can do a Google search and you won't find anything about such a case -- at least I didn't.

I did find out that Olagunju is a real person of some stature at Novartis:

David Olagunju Global Director, Statistical Reporting and Standards Novartis Pharmaceuticals Telephone: 862.778.3802

[Let the phone calls begin!]

He has also been a presenter at several pharmaceutical conferences.

But, is this a real whistleblower case or just a short-seller seeding seditious sallies against a drug up for review at the FDA?

Anyone serious about following up such issues to make a case for whistleblowing could easily determine if this case were real by examining SEC statements and other public corporate documents from Novartis, which must mention any legal actions that would affect the market for its stock. Of course, I am too lazy to do that, but I have an excuse. I am not a whistleblower blogger and I don't give a rat's ass amount of credibility to anonymous Cafepharma posts!

I guess I'm back on Peter's sh*t list!

P.S. I'm not ;-) See Peter's response and further inquiries: "The Novartis whistleblower story - is it for real?"

Cafe Pharma's Sarah Palmer Tames Boogalou Shrimp

Occasionally, I visit the Cafe Pharma discussion boards to see what's going on. But, frankly, after a nasty run-in with a few anonymous posters there -- see "Banned from CafePharma!" -- I haven't visited too often or dared to post anything under my own name.

Since then, I have exchanged a few friendly emails back and forth with Sarah Palmer who is the administrator of the site. Zookeeper or Animal Tamer may be more appropriate titles.

Last month, Sarah apparently banned a Cafe Pharma member who went under the pseudonym "Boogalou Shrimp." As I noted in a post made by Jane Chin on her Pharma Rep Clinic blog, "In his/her online profile, Boogalou Shrimp says his/her interests are 'Leg humping.' Since joining on 11 September 2006, Boogalou Shrimp has made 3,212 posts to CafePharma; an average of more than one post per hour, 24/7."

Boogalou Shrimp tried to win over people with posts like this: "Is John Mack an asshat or a fagbot? I can't decide?"

But Boogalou wouldn't be banned for something so innane as that. Yet, Sarah won't say why this person was banned. The following Cafe Pharma thread documents the banning:

I'll ask the question everyone wants to know
Why was Boogalou Shrimp banned?
--medrep1850

----------------
What's the deal. Sarah? You provided a damning case against Clem, the Black genocide agonist. The litany of Clem's rantings that you posted put his apologists in their place, thus shutting them up.

Now the Shrimp's been banned.

Let's see "your evidence" that you have compiled on Shrimp.
--thehairyfiddler

----------------
Sorry, but we cannot always divulge the reasons why posters are banned. There is no single reason in this case. The "final straw" had nothing to do with anything on the Political Discussions board. I'm sure he knows very well why he was banned. --Sarah Palmer

----------------
But certainly you can cite generalities for your decision, right? What "posting policy" did he violate? You don't have to be specific, here.

In his defense, he did a damn good job of fending off the calvary of white racists that stink up the political boards on a daily basis.

"The "final straw" had nothing to do with anything on the Political Discussions board."

Again, can't you share generalities?

"I'm sure he knows very well why he was banned."

Did he threaten to kill someone? I never saw a pattern of rule breaking with him. Maybe he melted down after having a few too many. Shit happens, ya know.
--thehairyfiddler

----------------
Sarah you lost all my respect. You must be kidding me...can't give the reason? I'm also black like shrimp and am consistently attacked on your site by racist. Why don't you do something about that?...or did you decide it's better to ban the black guy so the bigot's don't have a target? The latter is the only plausible reason I can think of and that's why you won't give a reason. You're just as bad as the bigots!
--Anonymous

----------------
Whatever. It's so funny...I get accused of being a flaming liberal by some, a bigot by others. Some have said I am black, and now I have a cold blue eye I'm just running a site with very busy message boards, where we have to make many daily decisions on how to make the boards the most usable for our visitors. I can assure you this - Boogalou Shrimp was not banned because of his race, or even because of anything having to do with racial/political discussions, race baiting, etc. You of course may believe as you want to believe, but don't expect me to answer your continued ranting when you have already been given your answer several times. --Sarah

See what I mean about "zookeeper" or "animal tamer" being more accurate descriptions of Sarah's job?

There are over 14,000 registered Cafe Pharma members, of which as many as 1,100 may be online at the same time. The site currently hosts nearly 150,000 threads and over 1.5 million posts!

Whatever we call Sarah's job, I don't envy her. Sarah, I am sorry I argued with you in the past about your administrative decisions. Keep up the good work and ban away!

'Round the Sphere: Bloggers Side with SiCKO (to a point and for now); Tongue-in-Cheek Free Lunch

Michael Moore's long-awaited documentary film SiCKO (why the lowercase "i"?), about the pharmaceutical-health-insurance-industry complex, is set to debut in Cannes this Saturday.

I wish I could be there, but I am temporarily without passport! So, I wrote an open letter to Moore and urged him to invite us bloggers to a special screening in NYC. If Centocor can do it with its film Moore should be able to as well! (See "Mr. Moore Don't Ignore: Please Invite Me to a Screening of Your Movie").

While I continue to advance the interests of pharma bloggers, other bloggers have pitched in with their own commentary on this film and Michael Moore.

Mark Senak, who confesses not to have seen any of Mike's films, nevertheless has some good advice on putting this movie into perspective:

"I would like to think that SiCKO is perhaps an opportunity for industry and for industry critics to do some soul-searching, asking the real tough questions about how people got to feeling the way they do about the healthcare and pharmaceutical industries, and what can be done about it. But for people on each side of the issue to spend time this summer calling the movie or its maker names isn't likely to advance anyone's image - industry or its critics." (See "The Summer of SiCKO - Cannes Film Festival Begins Today.")

This comment got a hearty "hear, hear" comment. Mark, if Moore takes my challenge and invites me to a special screening of SiCKO, I'll be sure to put in a good word for you as well.

Ed Silverman over at Pharmalot expressed a similar point of view:

"Getting beat up in a widely publicized movie isn't likely to make execs and their employees feel warm and fuzzy. Few people respond well to harsh criticism. So ignoring or chastising Moore and his film is likely to be a typical reaction. But that won't make the issues disappear. If anything, big pharma will only appear more defensive, and confirm impressions that critics say is all too real." (See "SiCKO Debuts At Cannes On Saturday").

Ed got some decidedly nasty comments, including this one, which brought the Holocaust into play:

"Occam's Beard says:

Sorry, don't mean to become a gadfly here, but I can't let this pass either without examining the logic.

Or has industry made it easy for him - and other critics - to pull out the long knives? This requires a gamut of people ...to look in the mirror and ask why their industry is increasingly villified.

So unpopularity necessarily has a just basis that the unpopular would do well to reflect on and change their ways?

Perhaps that should be pointed out to German Jews, if you can find any. Demonizing the unpopular is child's play."

I am not sure this qualifies as a direct comparison of Moore's anticipated treatment of Pharma to German Nazi's' demonizing of jews, but there you have it! Occam must not be a proponent of the First Amendment!

Other bloggers in the Pharma Blogosphere^TM posted reports about SiCKO, but had nothing new to add.

Meanwhile, the brouhaha over the Cupcake Caper (see "'Round the Sphere With Christiane Truelove") has morphed to a brouhaha about pharma free lunches to physicians and patients in general.

When Black Kitty first raised the issue of appropriate food to give to patients -- cupcakes didn't seem to meet BK's criteria of appropriate -- I thought this was worthy to follow up with some general guidelines of pharma's nascent free lunch for patients program (see "Guidelines for Gifts to Patients"). I had written on free lunch for patients before (see "Free lunch for patients! Why not?") and thought this was an appropriate topic to add on to.

But that story is history.

Pharma's Free Lunch for Physicians Program
What really hit a nerve is when I revisited pharma's practice of free lunch for PHYSICIANS and reported that 62% of respondents to a poll agreed that this practice should ceaase (see "Blog Readers' Opinions on Physician Marketing & Education Practices").

Sarah Palmer, Cafe Pharma webmaster, reminded me that such a poll is not statistically significant. I'm not questioning that -- Sarah and I are on good speaking terms now and I don't wish to reopen old issues. But I will say that in this new age of Web 2.0 and "The Wisdom of Crowds," online polls, rating score and opinions from readers, regardless of the statistical significance, will have an increasing impact on the pharmaceutical industry.

Some industry experts, like Bob Ehrlich, Chairman of DTC Perspectives, have even suggested that Blogs may some day rival DTC (direct to consumer) advertising in influencing consumers (see "Blogs vs. DTC: What's Best for Consumers?").

I think that's what he said. But you don't have to be satisfied with my interpretation. Mr. Ehrlich will be my guest on an upcoming Pharma Marketing Talk podcast on Thursday, May 24, 2007, 1 PM Eastern US time. You can access this podcast here.

Regarding my post about the poll that called for an end to pharma free lunch to physicians, I received a comment from an anonymous physician who said:

"I would just like to say that as a former intern and resident working 100-hour weeks while making less than $30K a year, a free lunch now and then was a godsend and brightened up otherwise long and dreary days."

"Seriously, though, I do understand why institutions are moving toward these 'No Free Lunch' things, but really, cut the scut workers a break every now and then. If you've been there, you know how it sucked and how a free lunch was like having recess."

Of course, I took him/her at his/her word and went on to post a little spoof about free lunch being more than just lunch (see "When is a Free Lunch More Than Just Lunch?").

The guy took all this too seriously: "Like I've said, I don't deny that there are issues, but in the world of pharma and medicine, this is such piddling nothing, I have a hard time understanding your obsession with it."

Chill out, dude. You need a Valium, not pizza! You are so full of yourself that YOU cannot recognize when someone else makes comments "with considerable tongue-in-cheek"!

But, you have to wonder, if free lunch was such a "piddling nothing," why does the drug industry spend so much on its "free lunch for physician" program (which I once estimated cost about $1.65 billion per year; see "Free Lunch Redux") and why do physicians like this get so worked up about criticism of the program? It obviously means a lot to them -- like a free entitlement that they will fight tooth and nail to maintain!

Of course, it's not just lunch; it's the golden key that gets reps in the physician's door (see chart above), which is closing to more and more drug reps. The industry itself recognizes it has only itself to blame -- Pfizer, for example, recently cut back the practice of "rep pods" by which a number of reps hit the same doctor with the same message until the doc caves in!

That's it for now. Go forth and explore the sphere!

Welcome to Cafepharma's Detailpiece

Cafepharma has started a new blog called Cafepharma' Detailpiece. Here's their welcome message:

Cafepharma staff will be blogging pharma from the unique viewpoint of the pharmaceutical sales community. We will be opening discussions on various topics in pharma news, pulling relevant discussions from the cafepharma message boards and more. Please feel free to join in the discussion by posting comments to any posts.

I have no doubt that this will be an interesting blog, worthy of inclusion immediately into the Inner Planets of the Pharma Blogosphere^TM.

Us other bloggers will no longer be able to scoop up and co-opt Cafepharma message board discussions -- Cafepharma's Detailpiece will alwasy beat us to the punch!

Who Loves Ya Baby? The TOP 5 Blogs According to Industry Readers

As many readers of the Pharma Blogosphere^TM blog know, back in February we hosted the First Ever Pharma Blogosphere reader survey. A sampling of results of this survey have already been published on this blog (see "Industry Bias in the Pharma Blogosphere" and "Pharma Blogosphere Survey Results - Who and Why?").

The full results of the survey will be published in the April, 2007 issue of Pharma Marketing News and presented at the Spring 2007 Healthcare Blogging Summit 2007 being held in Las Vegas on April 29. (I better get my ass in gear to get ready for that!).

In this installment I present some data showing the top 5 pharma blogs ranked by survey respondents who said they were employed at pharmaceutical companies. Recall that blogs were ranked according to Readability (layout, ease of reading and finding information), Usefulness (for keeping readers aware of the issues), and Credibility (accuracy of information). The results are shown in the following slide.

Note: N=43 industry readers; shows top five blogs in each category; only blogs with more than 5 respondent ratings were considered.

Some Take-aways
Only three blogs -- In the Pipeline, EyeOnFDA, and Pharma Marketing Blog -- made the "Industry Top 5" in each category. Props to In the Pipeline for being #1 in Usefulness and Credibility, and #2 in Readability!

Surprisingly, Drug Wonks was considered the most readable, but did not make the Top 5 in either of the other 2 categories. I reveal more about that in the upcoming Pharma Marketing News article.

Sorry, Peter, Question Authority -- popular as it might be among all readers -- did not make the "Industry Top 5" in any category! But I will say this: Industry readers thought that Question Authority was more supportive of the industry than did non-industry readers! In fact, it was second on that list (behind Pharma Marketing Blog) of blogs that the industry thought supportive. Perhaps if the survey was done over again today, industry respondents would have a different opinion! Perhaps more closely aligned with a view expressed on CafePharma; namely, "This Rost guy is a Michael Moore crony that is an industry and medical community outcast that has nothing better to do then sit at his computer all day long blogging about things he knows little about, blowing things out of proportion, and surfing porn."

Caveats
Kind in mind that this survey covered only 22 blogs. Today the field is much bigger! Also, several blogs were very new when the survey was run and, consequently, may not have had enough history to be properly judged.

There will be another Pharma Blogosphere Reader survey in the Fall. Stay tuned!

Civility on CafePharma: Oxymoronic Wishhful Thinking

On Pharma has taken on CafePharma, calling for "a little civility" (see "How About a Little Civility, On-Line and Off? Thoughts on Cafe Pharma and Blogger Kathy Sierra’s Call for a Code of Conduct").

To respond to this call for a code of conduct, I decided that a point-counterpoint approach would be entertaining if not enlightening. I will take the point whereas a colleague -- let's call him/her "anonymous" -- will handle the counterpoint.

Point (John Mack): Forgive me for saying so, Ms. Shanley (who I assume wrote the On Pharma post), but a call for civility on CafePharma is a bit oxymoronic, wouldn't you say? It would be in the realm of other famous oxymorons like "military intelligence" and "ethical pharmaceuticals."

Please don't take my criticisms personally; I really enjoy your blog and urge everyone to read it, although I note that no one has bothered to comment on your post or any other post on your blog that I can see. Not that that's a bad thing! But you are free to throw rocks at CafePharma because you don't live in a glass house like it does. What I mean to say -- and forgive me for being so blunt and please realize that this is "tough love" from a friend -- you are not saying anything that your readers seem to care strongly about. Consequently, you don't have to put up with any nasty, heat-of-the-moment comments. A code of conduct, therefore, would be easy for you to implement, but would be impossible for CafePharma, which has over 14,000 over-sexed registered users and gazillions of posts! Again, forgive me for being so critical. I think you are a wonderful person.

Counterpoint (anonymous): The only word that can accurately describe you is inept. Are you kidding me? Stick your ethics up your ass. Listen up, you skeevy retard: You should have clean hands before you start spewing moral turpitude...Typing fagbot on an internet forum is not the same thing as screaming it out while waiting at the counter for my BK Broiler. You remain an idiot! Selfish egotistical asshole. If you are so interested in doing the right thing why don't you ... get into a circle jerk?

["anonymous" quotes were abstracted from several actual CafePharma posts.]

Bloggers Compete to Sling Mud at AZ; CafePharma Slings Back

Another day and another flurry of Rost e-mail and Rost posts that lead to posts on other blogs -- most notably pharmalot, BrandweekNRX, and PharmaGossip!

Even Rost is getting tired of the one-upmanship needed to keep up with the "journalist bloggers" who seem to have too many resources at their disposal.

In this mud-slinging contest it seems that anything is blogworthy -- even drivel posted on the CafePharma bulletin boards. All the aforementioned blogs have posted CafePharma comments or links to these comments (see here, here, and here).

However, they have left out the juiciest CafePharma comments, which I now will dutifully reproduce here.

"Group of seven of the biggest pussies... Stick your ethics up your ass. Posting BS on cafepharma is soooooo ethical. You and Michael Moore -looking out for society. I feel soooo comforted. One needs to have a nut sack before they start preaching about ethics." [Hat Tip to Pharma Ethics, My Foot! Blog]

"What next - Peter Rost reports that an anonymous insider at AZ HQ transcribed the writing on the men's bathroom wall and this just in "...Blogspot.com reports that AZ VIP shits here every morning at about ten-thirty and he just TEARS the place up... AZ VIP has stinkiest shit in all of pharma...". You heard it here first at AnonymousButTruePharmaPostings@TrueShit.Blogspot.com."

"Peter Peter - this just in. We have been backdating options, we are hiding costs with overseas funds transfers, we rigged the data on almost all our clinical trials, we put investigational drugs into the eyes of baby rabbits, we are against women, blacks, gays and middle aged white men, some of our employees speak foreign languages, our reps try to sell to doctors every day, and those are not raisins in the salad in the employee cafeteria, they are rat turds. Blog that asshole."

"This Rost guy is a Michael Moore crony that is an industry and medical community outcast that has nothing better to do then sit at his computer all day long blogging about things he knows little about, blowing things out of proportion, and surfing porn."

Ha, ha! I can see it now. Rost and Moore yukking it up, throwing back a few beers (well, beers for Moore, Martinis for Rost). Yep, they really don't like Rost. Surprise, Surprise!

They have a few choice words for the AZ Group of Seven. Whereas, PharmaGossip compares them to the Magnificent Seven, CafePharma AZ reps have something else in mind:

"Group of 7.....
looser
fuck-head
cock-sucker
douche bag
traitor
sloppy cunt
dick wipe

Get the picture ass holes?
Selfish egotistical assholes. If you are so interested in doing the right thing why don't you all get into a circle jerk and then have a deep discussion to discuss your exit strategy from AZ."

Ah! That CafePharma aroma! I love the smell of CafePharma! That smell...you know, that genitalia smell.. It smells like...Victory!

Some day this mud slinging's going to end....

'Round the Sphere: The Zubillaga Affair and Aftermath

The Zubillaga Affair is ringing through the Pharma Blogosphere, turning a quiet holiday weekend into a blog feeding frenzy!

In case you are just coming back from a sans Internet vacation, the Zubillaga Affair concerns an AstraZeneca internal Oncology newsletter that published a controversial analogy made by Mike Zubillaga, AZ's Mid-Atlantic regional sales director/oncology. Mike was subsequently terminated and AZ is currently trying to worm its way out of an embarrassing regulatory/employee management faux pas.

It all started with a post on CafePharma, which is not technically a blog, but by virtue of this recent flap, has won a place in the "Outer Sphere" list (see right).

Then, Peter Rost got hold of the "smoking gun" and distributed it amongst his blogger pals (see Question Authority).

The story was quickly picked up by BrandweekNRX, Pharmalot, PharmaGossip, and finally, AP via the Philadelphia Inquirer!

The best way to track all this is under Question Authority's AstraZeneca topic label.

While other bloggers speculated on who else would be fired at AZ to coverup its lax oversight of published employee comments, I refelected on how this would affect the adoption of blogging by pharmaceutical companies (see "The Zubillaga Affair: Effect on the Prospects for Pharma Blogging").

Although I feel this will nip off any pharma "toes in the blogging water," I still held out hope for pharma employee blogs if the following criteria could be met:

Rules for Pharma Employee Blogging
The following personnel should NOT be allowed to contribute to employee blogs:

• Marketing, sales, legal, or corporate communications personnel
• Managers or higher

The following personnel should be ENCOURAGED to contribute to employee blogs:

• Rank and file employees including secretaries, assistants, etc.
• Research and development personnel, including clinicians, lab people, etc.

Peter Rost thought I had lost my mind:

I have to admit that I fail to understand why a secretary could be more trusted blogging than someone in legal, or corporate communications personnel. John, are you OK over there???

Frankly, to think that any highly regulated pharma company would encourage their employees to blog at anytime, anywhere, about anything, including the company is ludicrous.

I offer the following in defense of my sanity:

My idea for pharma employee blogs is to help pharmaceutical companies bring opinions of the rank-and-file employee to the forefront.

We always hear from the corporate shills and the sales and marketing people as well as approved messages from managers, directors and CEOs. These employees are incorrigible BS artists! What I seldom get to hear is what the rank-and-file "pharma folks" think.

I would never trust ANY employee to submit posts to a blog without some oversight (ie, moderation)! But the oversight should be a decision to post the entry or not to post it, rather than submitting it to corporate communications for a re-write. The employee can be asked to reword some things to protect trade secrets, etc., but the employee can opt-out of having the edited post put into the blog.

Who should moderate such a blog? That is a good question. Sorry, I don't feel like giving away all my ideas for free!

The important thing is to hear the "voice" of the rank-and-file. I believe that many of these people are honest people who believe in what their companies are doing and they may not like some excessive marketing and sales practices that we all see criticized every day.

From the perspective of the pharma company, I am sure they would not want negative blog posts from employees pointing out the problems of the industry -- there is enough of that on CafePharma and elsewhere.

What the industry needs -- and frankly what I'd like to see -- is genuine, POSITIVE stories told in the real voice of employees. Yes, it may be one-sided, but it is the side of the story the industry always complains never gets told, at least not from believable sources.

P.S. Poll Results
I almost forgot to mention the PharmaGossip Poll. According to Peter Rost in a comment to the WSJ Health Blog post on this subject: "According to the poll going on over at PharmaGossip, most people seem to feel that the guy was just telling it like it is and that AstraZeneca is trying to put out a fire they started. I agree with those comments, especially considering that AstraZeneca had no problem with the quotes in the newsletter for months, until it was discovered by news media."

P.P.S. AZ Takes No Action Until Discovered by News Media
Although we have to give the Pharma Blogosphere (especially Question Authority) for "breaking" this story, it still takes the traditional media to get action. Of course, we've seen this time and time again.

The lesson here is that pharmaceutical companies need to monitor the Pharma Blogosphere with more diligence and they may be able to buy some time to make the right decision BEFORE it hits the press!

P.P.P.S. It Was Beauty (Rost) That Killed the Beast Zubillaga!
See comments.

Welcome Confarta!

A new member has been added to the Outer Sphere of the Pharma Blogosphere: the Confarta Blog!

Confarta blog is brought to us by the Williams & Williams Pharmaceutical Company. Since 2004, Williams & Williams has been providing relief for millions of people around the world. We are a full service pharmaceutical company that lives by the motto, "In all phases of life, we're right behind you."

This is the first ever pharmaceutical company sponsored blog! (Hat Tip to Peter Rost for the link!)

Charles Charles is the company's #1 sales rep. View this video of Charles in action:



Although Charles believes in the motto "Always be Closing," he does have time to explore CafePharma: