2010.03.16

Sanofi-Aventis missed its Tylenol moment: a cautionary tale

Pharmaceutical company Sanofi-Aventis, the maker of chemotherapy drug Taxotere, is learning some tough lessons about the culture of communication and customer relations in the digital age.

On March 8, Ann Adams posted a photo of her bald head on Sanofi-Aventis’ Facebook page with the text “Good morning Sanofi, I had your drug Taxotere and as you can see from my photo this is what my scalp looks like 4 years later. Do you have any comment to make?” Of course, the post drew public attention to the matter of permanent hair loss resulting from Taxotere, but not nearly as much attention as the heavy-handed move by Sanofi-Aventis.

Rather than acknowledge the post, Sanofi-Aventis blocked Ms. Adams from their Facebook account.

Ooops!!!

Closing your eyes doesn’t make the problem go away. More importantly, slamming the door on someone with even passing knowledge of social media and a personal story everyone can get behind is a heavy-handed and misguided move these days.

It didn’t take long for the same photo to start popping up in other relevant Facebook groups and gain traction in other social media sites including Twitter. Sanofi-Aventis now finds itself with two very public PR nightmares: the possible long-term side effects of their product and a very public move which suggests a disinterest in people.

It’s amazing the corporate world has learned very little from time-proven case studies like Tylenol and Maple Leaf Foods. These are classic stories of companies emerging with an even better public image resulting from their crisis management, communication and people-first values. Instead, Sanofi-Aventis took its lead from Tiger Woods and Toyota.

Certain industries may be bound by specific regulations on what can and cannot be said to the public under specific circumstances and no doubt the legal department wants to play a front-and-centre role in these kinds of situations (you needn’t look further than the language used by companies in crisis communication). However, I can’t help but think a personally-inflected reply might have made this situation a positive one for the company and industry.

Striking the balance between regulatory restrictions, legal advice and the public interest is a difficult one for many companies that are joining the new age of democratized media reactively rather than proactively — particularly since there’s a very fine line between responses that are too quick for the company and too slow for the public. Companies are learning the hard way that you can’t use new channels for pushing out traditional messages; companies derive value for themselves by delivering value for the masses.

Publicly acknowledging Ms. Adams’ situation and pain may have led to people praising Sanofi-Aventis for listening and being responsive. Journalists and Facebook followers might now be giving props to the company for putting people first and the story would be about caring and real communication rather than Big Pharma dismissing the people that paid dearly — financially and physically — for its drugs. I believe Sanofi-Aventis missed a perfect opportunity to have positioned itself as the daring champion of the industry.

2010.03.15

What will PM Stephen Harper do with this opportunity?

The deadline for  submitting and voting for questions to PM Harper closed yesterday which means the PMO is now selecting from the most voted-for questions in preparation for the PMs video response.

This is where things will get interesting.

Response is pretty good for an online initiative that gave the public less than a week. According to the Your Interview with Prime Minister Harper webpage, the initiative attracted “170,001 votes on 1,797 questions from 5,128 people.” It’s an ambiguous stat which I’m guessing means just more than five thousand people both submitted and voted on the the questions. So, when the media give the initiative extra attention for the PMO’s use of social media, you can also expect the digital naysayers to point out this campaign attracted participation from 0.0015% of the Canadian population. It’s worth noting that the Canadians Against Proroguing Parliament Facebook group attracted more than twice that number in its first week.

Noticeably absent from the site is the ability for participants and visitors to categorize (or keyword tag) the questions (e.g. natural resources, child care, finance, general…) or sort them based on vote count. That means it’s not as easy to find RuthLBarth’s question on falling crime rates and a US-style for-profit prison industry, nor is it easy to determine if the vote count makes it more likely to get selected than George Jodin’s question about wasting money on the non-issue of global warming.

H.D. Munroe asks “How will we know that you are answering “top-voted” questions from this site, instead of picking the questions you want to answer? (The site doesn’t show vote tallies, so users can’t audit your choices independently.)“‘

Even if Francais McKellan’s and Dan Grice’s questions about legalizing cannabis don’t get answered, they are far and away two of the most voted-on questions. In fact, marijuana and medicinal marijuana appear in multiple and highly voted-on questions and Canadian cannabis advocate Marc Emery, who faces extradition to the U.S., is the subject of at least one question. Will the PMO tackle this issue on YouTube? Which issues did they expect to come up?

So, over to you Prime Minster Harper. What are you going to do with this opportunity?

2010.03.09

An update on House of Tweets

House of Tweets, my report about the use of Twitter by elected members of Canada’s House of Commons, has drawn a lot of attention from the media. In fact, I just came from the CBC building where I was interviewed by Daniel Thibeault for TéléJournal (airing this Friday night). The more I talk about the report, the more I realize there are other measures of Twitter use by MPs that I hadn’t included in the report and people seem interested in.

For instance, I didn’t analyze the number of Twitter messages generated by each party during the assessment period. A quick check of the numbers based on my research identified that among the active Twittering MPs, the Liberals rank first for the number of Twitter messages generated (6,289), the Conservatives follow (5,209), the NDP third (4,086) and the Bloc are last (408).

The average number of Tweets generated by the actively Twittering MPs puts the Conservatives first (274), the Liberals hot on their heels (273) followed by the NDP (255) and the Bloc (102). These averages may have changed over the last few weeks, particularly since Liberal MP Denis Coderre has been absolutely on fire, publishing 1,177 Tweets between the close of the initial research (Feb. 19) and this morning (Mar. 9). The next most active Twittering MPs since the publishing of the report trail by an order of magnitude — Conservatives Patrick Brown (86) and James Moore (76). Among James Moore’s Tweets this month is the announcement that U2 lead singer Bono would like to speak with him about copyright.

Since the report was published on February 25, all of the identified dormant Twitter accounts remain dormant and NDP MP Dennis Bevington is the only MP to have opened a new account (March 3) though he hasn’t published any updates.

If I can get them in the same room for about 30 minutes, I’d like to audio record a round table discussion with James Moore, Denis Coderre and Libby Davies about Twitter as a communication tool, their approach to digital communication and engagement, and the role of digital in politics and democratic participation.

© 2005 - 2010 Mark Blevis. Design by SnowyDay