Reputation Gurus

Why do people prefer branded consumer products over no-names, but not a branded drug over its copycat generic?  Take the very popular iPod, for which there are cheaper alternatives, like Sansa. Or TVs – Sony and Panasonic come to mind – but there are plenty of cheaper alternatives, like Vizio and Olevia.  Yet, I don’t think anyone would suggest that the iPod or Sony TV will go away.But, when it comes to drugs – which affect your health and well-being far more than an electronic gadget – people overwhelmingly prefer the generic.  Payers clearly play a large part in this, but public sentiment still favors the generic.  A recent forecast of the pharmaceutical market (IMS Health’s 2008 Global Pharmaceutical Market and Therapy Forecast) shows global growth of 5 percent to 6 percent in 2008.  But it forecasts that generics will grow by 14 percent to 15 percent.

The apology that CEO Mark Zuckerberg of Facebook made yesterday on his blog is just the beginning of Facebook’s comeback from its kerfuffle over it’s latest adversting feature, which the company introduced last month.  I think that anyone who saw even one article about the feature at launch could have predicted that Facebook members were not going to stand for such over-commercialization of their online activity.  One expert was quoted in today’s New York Times (December 6, 2007) as saying “This is a bit of an example of Facebook being … out over your skis.”

I don’t know about Facebook and its skis, but there are some interesting elements to this story that would have been shocking even just a year ago.

First, it’s shocking that Facebook thought they could get away with this type of advertising program, and that they didn’t provide enough of a notice to allow users to opt-out.  In the UK, any type of direct-mail or direct-email campaign must allow consumers the opportunity to opt-out by law.  This is a refreshing change for an American living overseas.

Second, it’s shocking that Facebook … despite its apology and changes it has made to the system … still will not provide a universal opt-out option.  It seems as if the company still thinks that it has cracked the code of a viable online business model and won’t let go.  But, I predict that this will change in the near future.

Finally, perhaps the most shocking part of all — and, it’s really not all that shocking today, although it still surprises me — are the comments that Facebook users made about the system.  Outraged Facebook users largely commented on how Facebook created “private” space to share experiences … and therefore, expressed a sense of violation that Facebook sold personal information … This just smacks in the face of common sense. 

Private?  Facebook?  Since when was anything online really private?  Yet, even early 30-somethings insist that Facebook has violated their privacy … as if their privacy wasn’t already violated by putting their deepest, darkest secrets online for thousands to read.