Rost Replaces Edwards at BrandweekNRX - Can it Be True?

Do you believe in coincidences? How about this one...

Last week, Peter Rost, "the drug industry's most annoying - and effective - online scourge," announced that he was hired to be a journalist for "a real magazine; you know, printed paper and hundreds of thousands of subscribers. Or something in that range." (see "Rost Now an Authority, Renames Blog")

Then, today, Jim Edwards of BrandweekNRX writes:

"This will be my last post on this blog. As I walk off into the sunset to do this, someone new will take over for a while. I won’t spoil the surprise; check back tomorrow."

Coincidence?

I think not!

My inquiry to Jim Edwards regarding this matter via a comment to his post and personal email has gone unanswered as of this writing.

Rost responded to my email request to "confirm or deny" this rumor and asked me to name my "credible source" aka "Deep Throat."

I think if Rost intends to be a journalist, the first thing he needs to learn is that we bloggers have a tradition of protecting our sources! Of course, he was just pulling my chain and refused to confirm or deny the rumor.

One would think that hiring a pharma industry whistleblower as a journalist to cover the pharma beat would bend the notion of unbiased reporting so far as to break it, but there may be some benefit to pharma if Brandweek hires Rost, as my "Deep Throat" points out:

"Now, if I were to put my Machiavellian hat on, I could imagine a cabal of pharma corporate PR types banding together and convincing Brandweek to take him on as a way of 'domesticating' him -- subjecting him to editorial oversight and at least semi-journalistic standards vs. the buccaneer figure he's been cutting up to now... paycheck and prospect of promotion to the 'majors' (i.e., the print version of Brandweek) riding on whether he goes overboard or not."

Hmmm... Rost the pharma beat guy at Brandweek -- not as preposterous as it sounds!

'Round the Sphere: Commies, Canadians, and Death by Drugs!

This week, the Pharma Blogosphere was abuzz about the two death sentences handed down to two of China's former high-ranking food and drug safety officials. One was just executed as reported in the Wall Street Journal Health Blog and Pharmalot.

It is said that injection by lethal drugs is becoming the standard method of carrying out the death penalty in China (see "Chinese applaud ex-official's execution").

Meanwhile, other supposedly non-lethal drugs have lead to the death of a Canadian citizen -- "first clear-cut case of a death stemming from counterfeit drugs bought on the Internet."

Of course, a chief wanker at Drug Wankers couldn't hold back the gloating to respond to the age-old re-importation retort" "Oh, Yeah. If Canadian drugs are dangerous, where are the dead Canadians?"

Expect Pitts et al to refer to this case again and again and again and again... did I mention again? in the diatribes against re-importation.

Meanwhile, the other Peter (Peter Rost), was quoted in Forbes pointing out the irony:

"The FDA recently put out a warning on the dangers of Internet medicines. Peter Rost, a former Pfizer executive whose blog is an annoyance to drug execs, notes an "irony" in the situation: that the first victim of drug reimportation lives in Canada, and got a drug that is not approved there but is available to the rest of the world."

In his own blog, Peter suggests that rather than an argument AGAINST re-importation, this event is really an argument FOR re-importation!:

"So now all the reactionary elements in American politics will claim drug reimportation claimed its first life. I'm sure they think it is too bad it wasn't American blood.

"Of course there is a logical solution to all this. Make drug importation legal and regulated the trade, so that people don't go on the Internet when their money dries up."

Speaking of China, Canadians and Other "Commies"

Of course, Canadians are not really commies. They just have a commie medical system according to the wankers among us.

It's one thing to stretch the commie analogy to describe the Canadian healthcare system, but it's another to accuse J&J's corporate blog of being the "Pravda of J&J." But that is exactly what Jim Edwards over at BrandweekNRX did!

Ouch! Tough love indeed!

But let's look at the glass half-full instead of half-empty, shall we?

Did you know, for example, that Pravda is the Russian word for "The Truth"? I bet you dinnit! Marc Monseau, the author of JNJ BTW, might take some comfort from being labeled "The Truth of J&J." At least he wasn't called the "CNN of J&J," which might be a much less flattering comparison.

But Jim has a point. If a corporate blog remains silent on issues roiling around it, then suspicions are aroused. It's best to say something, even if it is to refer to the official company press release, which is some form of "truth" if not absolute truth. I suspect that's what Pravda would do.

Of course, this is not what we expect of blogs. But what should we expect from a blog like JNJ BTW?

You can read more about my opinion on that subject in Pharma Marketing Blog (see "Advice to All Pharma PR Bloggers Out There").

Jim Edwards and the Girl Scout Cookie Monster Sudafed Mashup!

Recently, the Pharma Blogosphere has been awash boondoggles, capers, and scandals. First there was the Buckets of Cash Zubillaga Affair and the Cupcakes in the Waiting Room Caper, now there's the Girl Scout Cookie Monster Sudafed Mashup!

Jim Edwards of BrandweekNRX posted a correction of sorts to an article he wrote in BrandWeek a while back entitled "Who's at the Door? J&J With Your Meds." In that article, Jim said: "Johnson & Johnson wants to turn Girl Scout troops into 'drug dealers' - but it's all for a good cause."

This apparently, riled the J&J PR people according to Jim.

"To my surprise," claims Jim, "McNeil was furious, and I got an earful from one of their PR people about a day after it came out. 'We're not trying to turn Girl Scouts into drug dealers," they fumed. "We demand a correction.'"

You can read all about -- from Jim's perspective -- here on BrandweekNRX.

Of course, a "correction" is impossible after the cat is already out of the bag. Or should I say, cookie already out of the jar? Jim's piece was picked up by the press in stories entitled "Girl Scouts Selling Drugs?" And the rest, as they say, is history.

What Hat Are Journalist Bloggers Wearing Today?
Edwards says this is a "Lesson in How Media Viruses Work." Hmmm... it's also a lesson on how journalists can be "corrupted" by the loose standards of bloggers, IMHO. I mean, as a blogger, you might get away with using sensational or "flippant" phrases to capture readers' attention, but a journalist is held to a higher standard. In Brandweek, Jim is a journalist, in BrandweekNRX, he is a blogger. Could it be that he forgot which hat he was wearing when he wrote the original story?

BTW, there's nothing about this on JNJ BTW, J&J's PR blog, which I think is a shame. That's what a corporate blog should be for -- you got to get your voice out there in the blogosphere and not just let it come through filtered by us bloggers.

P.S. Proving once again that great minds think alike, Jack Friday just reminded me about his post on the J&J Girl Scout story. His post uses the same Girl Scout image as this one! I swear i did not intentionally copy Jack, but it must have registered in my mind when I picked up the image elsewhere by Google search. There is one important difference: Jack combined Pepsid with the cookies, whereas I used a decongestant. Obviously, Pepsid is a better product to use in combination with cookies, although I suppose if you are allergic to cookies, a decongestant might help.

Wonks Bitch Slap Jim Edwards: Are We Going to Let Them Get Away with It?

Yesterday I mentioned Jim Edwards' post regarding Drug Wonks Demonization of Michael Moore. Jim used his personal experience to get an MRI as support for his thesis that the Wonks' cause is lost.

Now chief bully wonker Robert Goldberg is trying to sling mud at Jim and the rest of bloggers who share his view with insults like this:

"For the record, drugwonks aims to be the truth dectector [sic; LOL] for Moore's propaganda film Sicko. That is the least we can do for thos (sic) Kool-Aid drinking bloggers who blindly follow a guy who denied health care coverage to his employees when he was producer of TV nation."

Let's see. TV Nation was produced when? Is this relevant now? Should we listen to anyone who cannot even use a spell checker!

"Now some have nothing better to do than price MRIs."

"Oh, and the MRI? Use it to a conduct a more careful analysis of your own sloppy arguments in defense of hypocritical and overweight directors."

Goldberg is a coward! He won't dare say that to Jim's face by naming him in his blog! or at least linking to Jim's post.

No, Drug Wonks never links out to the "enemy" Kool-Aid drinking bloggers!

Cowards! PR Wonks!

I note that all the invective aimed at Moore and his movie is based on what the Wonks have seen in movie trailers and on Oprah. They don't have the nerve to see the film they are criticizing and must constantly stoop to calling people names!

Cowards! PR Wankers!

'Round the Sphere: Not-as-black-as-you-think-you-are and Blog Schmog Point-Counterpoint

Jim Edwards over at BrandweekNRX wonders whether "not-as-black-as-you-think-you-are" genes are responsible for lackluster sales of BiDil -- the first drug approved specifically for "self identified" African Americans. Jim posits that maybe this group is not as black as they think they are and casts doubt on "race-based medicine" (see "BiDil Falters, Casting Doubts on Race-Based Medicine").

John Mack, over at Pharma Marketing Blog, believes this is a bogus argument and places BiDil's problems squarely in marketing's court (see "BiDil Sales Disappoint: Blame Genes or Marketing?"). As usual, I don't just criticize, I offer an innovative solution to the problem of marketing to minorities.

Meanwhile, Agnes Shanley over at On Pharma is casting some doubt of her own and questions the utility of blogs: "Zube-gate aside, rumors of your power to change the world have been greatly exaggerated," says Shanley (see "Blog, Schmlog: Tales from the Dark Side of Web 2.0").

"I Beg to Differ!," says Fard Johnmar over at HealthcareVOX. "To say that blogs are not significantly influencing health and healthcare is far from correct," says Fard (see "Agnes Shanley Says 'Blog Schmog'; I Beg To Differ").

Agnes has been posting some very interesting things on her blog lately and seems to have picked up some pointers from the rest of the pack, especially heating things up with some controversial postings.

Don't worry about lack of comments, Agnes. Keep up the good work and I am sure the comments will follow. It's not the quantity of comments you receive, but the quality and whether or not they move the discussion forward and teach us a thing or two.

Speaking of moving the discussion forward: don't bother making any comments here if all you are doing is pointing out my shortcomings! I am fully briefed on that subject. Just stick to the subject at hand and I am glad to pass your comments on. Otherwise, hasta la vista, baby!