 |
| |
|
|
Jack_www
|
|
From my understanding of what I read from that link that advertising though can be regulated. There are a lot of regurlations that are imposed on advertising. One that comes to mind is that a person that is endorsing a product has to use it or did use it. Also in regard to health suppliments and diet pills, the makes cannot claim that it can curse or treat any disease. There are many more examples where advertising for pure commerial interest is somewhat regulated by the government. Those regulations may have been losen over the years, but they still exist.
As for Doctors advertising in the United States, they do so all the time. Just get a copy of the yellow pages of any major US city and you can find ads for Doctors.
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Jack_www
|
|
quote:
Originally posted by Felch
Perscription drugs are advertised over the airwaves in the US, but if the benefits are cited so must the side affects. Thus you have the vague "You're life will improve when you ask your doctor about XTC," and the more specific, "XTC makes you ridicuously happy, but can also kill you." Also they direct you towards places where you can get more information, usually an ad in a general interest magazine.
It shouldn't happen like that though. But Big Pharma has Deep Pockets. |
Well I have watch many ads for perscription durgs, and it has not given me the urge to take the durgs or even talk about it with my doctor.
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Jack_www
|
|
quote:
Originally posted by Ming
A typical response... good for you... "some" people here think advertising can make people do all kinds of things they don't want...
|
I agree way to many people think that Advertising brain washes people into buying products. If someone does not want to buy something all the advertising in the world will not change it. Usually is targeted to people who will want to use that product, not to people who dont want to use the product.
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Jack_www
|
|
quote:
Originally posted by Bill3000
Ih my opinion, the dangers advirtisements for prescription drugs potentially have are a far cry from the dangers that some of the nonregulated drugs' advirtisements would have. |
What danagers are there in having a drug company telling people about a drug they sell??? That makes no sense to me.
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Jack_www
|
|
quote:
Originally posted by Bill3000
"whatever percieved dangers" and whatnot. Meh, my point of that post was on nonverified "herbal supplements." |
Oh, I agree with that point. Most of that trash often cause problems in people then actually help them.
|
|
| |
|
| |
|
|
|
-Jrabbit
|
 |
of the Electronic Egyptians
Feb 2002
time: 23:37
|
|
Amusing discussion. As for the legality, Felch's post above is correct.
Like Ming, I'm a long-time ad industry guy (he's agency-side, I'm client-side). The advertisement of new drugs is disturbing to me, for two reasons.
1) It encourages the pill-popping culture and thus increases number of doctor visits, number of prescriptions written. In the end, my health insurance costs go up.
2) The advertisement of products like Viagra and Cialis during times when kids are watching is, as a parent, inappropriate IMHO. It just feels wrong to have erectile "dysfunction" be fair game to advertise to a national audience...
I'm amazed at how many people are undaunted by the required side effects listing. "This purple pill will put you in a good mood. Oh BTW, may cause liver failure, migraines, high blood pressure, and your toes could fall off. But you'll be in a good mood!"
I understand that this sort of drug marketing is a function of things like stock prices and a need to amortize development costs as quickly as possibly, esp. before competitive products hit the markets. But the bottom line is that the drug companies are not just trying to reach the afflicted. In many cases, they are trying to expand the market for a drug by convincing people to ask for them. Knowing full well that many doctors (who have received an even more intensive B2B marketing campaign) would just as soon prescribe than to argue with their patients.
Bottom line: The drug companies have too much marketing money at their disposal.
|
|
| |
|
|
|
GameGeek
|
|
quote:
Originally posted by Urban Ranger
"Speech" is not the same as the universal set of all valid sentences you can make from a particular grammar.
"Speech" has a context and a content. |
Exactly. And as Lefty Scaevola noted, the question of I]whether[/I] advertising is speech is entirely different from the question of what legal protections advertising should get, and also separate from the question of whether or not, for example, pharmaceutical companies, doctors, or lawyers should advertise, in the sense of whether it's good for the public at large to allow such advertising. Free speech isn't really absolute. It's a question of how much freedom a particular type of speech gets. That's why we have the false advertising, slander, fighting words, etc., doctrines. There's also the question of whether the regulation at issue is a regulation of the form of the advertising, or its content. The two get tangled up a lot.
|
|
| |
|
| |
All times are GMT. The time now is 05:37.
Apolyton Time is 00:37. |
top of page
|
|
|
Forum Rules:
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts
|
HTML code is ON
vB code is ON
Smilies are ON
[IMG] code is ON
|
|
|
|
|
|
11-09-2005 10:22
|