PrintAfter years of holding back, the health industry has thoroughly embraced digital communications, mobile and social media. Much of this activity has been fueled by the rise of the "empowered e-patient," individuals who are using the Web and (in smaller numbers) mobile to research, consume and share health information. Currently, many in the U.S., Canada and Europe are using the Web for health purposes. In addition, the future is bright for mobile. According to some estimates, more than 500 million people will be using mobile health applications globally by 2015.
Despite this enthusiasm, some have serious concerns about marketing and communicating with consumers or patients via digital channels. In short, they argue these activities threaten patient privacy and are detrimental to public health.
For example, according to Medical Marketing and Media, a group of non-profit organizations recently petitioned the U.S. Federal Trade Commission "to investigate unfair and deceptive advertising practices that consumers face as they seek health information and services online." Also, as the U.S. Food and Drug Administration prepares to issue initial guidance on pharmaceutical digital marketing, physicians writing in the New England Journal of Medicine suggest that FDA action will lead to an "explosion of marketing in online social media."
In addition, according to recent news reports, the FTC appears favorable to requests by privacy advocates for greater restrictions on online tracking activities. The agency is considering asking Websites to institute a "do not track" tool.
Finally, there is evidence that privacy concerns prevent many from embracing certain social technologies for health. According to research by the Path of the Blue Eye Project, many Facebook users are holding back on sharing health information on the social network because of concerns about how marketers may use it.
The question of whether digital marketing and communications benefits or threatens patient privacy is critical for many members of Living the Path and deserves further discussion. What's your take on this issue? How can health marketing communications professionals use digital and mobile media channels responsibly? Is it possible for digital marketing to serve public health? What of patients and health consumers? Are they being helped or harmed?
We look forward to hearing your thoughts.
Digital Marketing and Public Health and Safety
By AHAconnect on Tuesday, December 7, 2010
"Digital Literacy" initiatives are long overdue. Over the past several years I have focused my work around 'health literacy' as defined by the Canadian Expert Panel on Health Literacy that defines it as:
"The ability to access, understand, evaluate and communicate information as a way to promote, maintain and improve health in a variety of settings across the life course."
As the use of online / digital communications continues to proliferate, it is critical as health communicators that we educate our clients and individuals about digital media to improve their literacy skills so that they can use these technologies and vehicles of communications in ways that are beneficial and safe.
One basic premise is: 'Don't publish anything about yourself online that you are not comfortable with the world being able to know about.' Even with so called security provisions put in place on social media sites like Facebook, these are vulnerable to being compromised -- and just because someone posts information intended only for a friend, does not mean that friend cannot re-publish it in a much broader format.
We have all seen stories of people's lives and careers being negatively impacted by indiscreet publishing of information and photos on social media sites that then goes viral. This is part of the important digital literacy discussion that needs to take place at every opportunity.
Digging Deeper into Digital Literacy
By fjohnmar on Tuesday, December 7, 2010
I think you make a great point re: the need for better digital literacy. Especially because it impacts not only how people can protect themselves online, but a host of other factors, including economic opportunity and the ability to process the wealth of information online.
As someone focused on digital literacy, I'm sure you're aware of the concept of the participation divide. It has to do with the fact that even when you provide people with access to digital content, the amount of time people spend using digital devices impacts how comfortable they are with these technologies.
Last year, we published an article on our wiki focusing on the participation divide (You can access it here:. We noted that In a 2006 white paper, titled "Confronting the Challenges of Participatory Culture: Media Education for the 21st Century" published by the MacArthur Foundation, MIT professor Henry Jenkins and colleagues argue:
"What a person can accomplish with an outdated machine in a public library with mandatory filtering software and no opportunity for storage or transmission pales in comparison to what a person can accomplish with a home computer with unfettered Internet access, high band-width, and continuous connectivity . . . The school system’s inability to close this participation gap has negative consequences for everyone involved.On the one hand,those youth who are most advanced in media literacies are often stripped of their technologies and robbed of their best techniques for learning in an effort to ensure a uniform experience for all in the classroom. On the other hand,many youth who have had no exposure to these new kinds of participatory cultures outside school find themselves struggling to keep up with their peers."
With the pace of technological change accelerating, I think that any digital literacy effort should also focus on the participation divide so that people not only are aware of the dangers of digital media, but have the skills to navigate the digital landscape successfully.
Re: [Living the Path Q&A Center] Does Digital Marketing Communic
By merryjwhitney on Monday, December 6, 2010
I think one inviolable rule could help assure that health marketing communications professionals use these forums responsibly: No stealth. Patients and health consumers are seeking accurate, timely information, both for general educational purposes and for specific ailments or conditions. They are helped by straightforward, honest dialogue, but may be harmed by advertising or marketing messages masquerading as health information.
That is not to suggest that there’s anything wrong with advertising and marketing messaging, of course. It may pay the bills, and make it possible to provide that straightforward, honest dialogue. When clearly identified as commercial content, it can be very helpful — especially to consumers who might benefit from the information and the product(s).
---------
---------
View original post: http://qnacenter.pathoftheblueeye.com/mailcomment/redirect/<9.179.0.1291...
RE: [Living the Path Q&A Center] Does Digital Marketing Communic
By JMCalo on Thursday, December 2, 2010
First of all, I disagree with your premise in the first sentence. I see many, many instances where this isn't the case. And if you visit some of the voluntary nonprofit health organizations, you'll see that they're far off from "embracing" social media. I'm not saying they aren't trying social media platforms like Facebook and Twitter. But many of these organizations are still behaving as though all they have to do is send out health messages in great quantities - much like they've done on their own websites and with brochures and other print materials. They aren't really having conversations, nor are they promoting them. I admit, as one of the people in my program predominantly responsible for our social media presence, it's a challenge to do so!
As far as the patient privacy thing, I'd have to see their specific issues that back that up. But when it comes to a detriment to public health and the "explosion of marketing" ...frankly, that train left the station many years ago. Those physicians you mention are likely back in the dark ages of technology -- I doubt a lot of them even know what Facebook and Twitter are. And heck, for decades we've seen on TV and heard ads on radio from "health" purveyors who are making false claims for their products. And already, if you spend anytime on Facebook or Twitter, you can find hundreds of pages from companies and their fans promoting less than healthy products, cigarettes included.
I'm not for sharing health information on social networks - not the kind of information that can alert insurance companies and unscrupulous sellers of voodoo medicine. People need to be educated, as usual, just as we've all had to be educated about Internet and phone scams. Do we need something more than HIPAA or an amendment to it?
You asked a lot of questions and I didn't want to get too windy. I look forward to what others have to say.
Thanks for reposting your comment.
By fjohnmar on Thursday, December 2, 2010
Jean:
Thanks for re-posting your comment. Much appreciated. I'll reformulate my response and get back to you with some of my original thoughts.
It Boils Down to What's Acceptable to Collect and What's Not
By fjohnmar on Thursday, December 2, 2010
Jean:
I've been thinking a bit about my response since the last one was wiped from the site after we had to do an emergency restart. First, to clarify, when I say that the health industry is embracing social media, I'm focusing specifically on my experience (and what I know of the data re: uptake.) When I started focusing on the importance of digital/social media in health back in the "dark ages" of 2005, many folks looked at me like I was crazy. Today, we're seeing adoption rates go up quarter by quarter. Now are people using these tools appropriately? Well, the answer in many cases would be no or not yet.
To your point regarding physicians, most rely on the Internet and we're seeing physican adoption rates of social media increase. For example, according to one study physicians spent 16% more time on social media sites in Q2 2010 than Q1 2010 (see study here: http://pbeye.info/3kh).
Regarding the patient privacy issue and Facebook online health sharing, what's interesting is that our research shows that people are more concerned about marketers getting ahold of their data than insurers.
The current debate around privacy has to do with efforts to link online media consumption habits with specific behaviors (i.e., purchasing). Based on the FTC complaint there are a number of health marketing firms that are actively profiling patients -- sometimes without adequate levels of informed consent.
On the one hand, Web and social media is one of the most measurable areas, but on the other it can be easy to go too far. It comes down to what's acceptable to collect and what's not.
Thanks again for your response.
Fard