Why? The Wikipedia listing is usually on the first page of the SERPs (search engine result page).

However, like anything a little knowledge can be dangerous. Perhaps that is what happened to Abbott and Astra Zeneca this summer.

Abbott: In a “Patients not Patents” press release it is stated Abbott Labs is a serial Wikipedia tamperer. “From one Abbott computer over 1,000 edits were made to Wikipedia.” Of course if it was simply updating the information, this would not be newsworthy.

Astra Zeneca: The original Wikipedia entry said: “Despite a general National Institutes of Health recommendation against its use in children or those under 18, as well as a known risk that teenagers taking the drug may be more likely to think about harming or killing themselves or to plan or try to do so, Seroquel is controversially marketed to parents of moody and irritable teenagers in magazines such as Parade Magazine and TV Guide.”

An Astra Zeneca employee changed it, deleting the first sentence and simply letting it read: Seroquel is controversially marketed to parents of moody and irritable teenagers in magazines such as Parade Magazine and TV Guide. The article goes on to say, “Not only is this edit questionable because it reduces the accuracy of the Wikipedia entry, but it violates the FDA’s fair balance regulations.”

The events that occurred this summer clearly indicates that we should be thinking about how we can minimize the risk employees will expose pharma company to potential FDA citations and product liability lawsuits due to their use of social media technologies.

Wiki Scanner is a tool that allows the user to see who has made an update to a Wikipedia entry. See what is going on with your brand at www.wikiscanner.virgil.gr

This is the same industry that ten years ago told me search marketing is unethical and we will not get it through regulatory. Yes, I am that old. Anyway, we all are aware of the negative perception the general population has of pharma. If you search in the Google results under any pharma brand you will find a number of negative results. In fact, on average, Catalyst finds about 30% of the branded keyphrase SERPs (Search Engine Results Page) are negative. Type “Vioxx” into a search engine, three of the first ten organic results are negative and three of the four paid search results are negative. Perform a test on your brand? What percentage is negative? What percentage is negative when you type in your competitor’s brand name? What is your tolerance policy? Do you have one? Perhaps you should present a policy to the corporation. Pharma Company X Best Practices: -if the SERP results for the brand name are negative by 25% or more, engage in search reputation management. Or if our SERPs are worse than our competitors, engage in Search reputation management.

What is the value?

• Fortunately, all online content leads to one central location, search engines. Whether this content is fact or fiction, the search engines are usually the first place consumers will form an impression of a brand. Manage the results on a SERP and you can better protect your online reputation.
• Secondly, and I know this is more of a giant leap, research you will better understand what people are saying about your brand and condition.

How does it work?

• Monitor your brand keyphrase results in the first five pages of the search engines; categorize them as positive, negative and neutral.
• Leverage your existing assets, optimize these assets. Pharma has patient testimonials, press releases, podcasts, TV commercials, etc. - if these assets are in a digital format, optimize them! Optimize these assets to appear in the search engines for your brand keyphrases. Crowd the negative results off the first couple of pages with your existing assets.
• Paid search: your paid search vendor should be monitoring and notifying the search engines of trademark misuse. Second, buy the top spot for your brand name.
• Domain misspellings and jacking. If you are a popular brand, beware; type in your brand name and really look at the results, far too often there is URL jacking. Folks buy a URL similar to yours and consumers are unaware and click on that link. For example, “Allavert.com”, which is a common misspelling for the the allergy drug Alavert.
• Continue monitoring, continue optimizing.

For more information check out our press release about Reputation Management.

“In the offline world, companies make it a priority to influence the message people see in the media. However, in the search marketing world, very few companies make an effort to influence the message seen in search results pages. Instead, many companies ensure their website(s) are at the top of page one, and leave Google, Yahoo and MSN free to determine what to display in the remaining positions.”

What is pharma to do? I know, I know as I am talking with many of you about SERP (search engine results page) reputation management, the answer is regulatory won’t let us look, let alone influence. If you are not from this industry, that seems crazy, but it’s what we are all grappling with right now.

We are afraid of the FDA, we are afraid of our internal regulatory committees (perhaps afraid is the wrong word). “What about adverse effects?”, they will ask with disdain. Who wants to fight that battle? We do. We are marketers, and it is in our blood to make sure we understand our market, develop and protect our brand. So, again, what is pharma to do?

Step One: To protect your brand and your company be aware of the threats - monitor the SERPs

Step Two: Assess the threat - analyze the SERPs

Step Three: Take action to remove the threat in the SERPs. How?

1. Contact Yahoo and Google Trademark Concern Team to remove paid search violations.
2. Optimize other brand assets to push the negative organic results/threats off the first couple results pages.

In the mean time, become an evangelist at your company. Create a solution that your regulatory team can live with, perhaps even present it to the FDA. Hire a firm to help you develop a corporate policy. Or start with baby steps, Step One in 2007.

The last thing our industry needs is another black eye. A real possibility is somewhere on the internet a person reads erroneous or old information about a drug and gets sick. We know what is next - the law firm!