Google Health Ads Blog Backs Off Sicko

By WebProNews Staff - Mon, 07/02/2007 - 06:15

A Google blogger posted a pro-healthcare industry item that criticized filmmaker Michael Moore's new film, while suggesting Google ads as a way to counter negative publicity.

Upon first seeing this item appear on the Google Health Advertising blog over the weekend, I thought Google's blogs had been hacked. It has happened before, and considering the crass, cynical content, it's a bit of a shock coming from the "don't do evil" search advertising company.

Here's an excerpt of the post by Lauren Turner, listed as an account planner for Google health ads:

Moore’s film portrays the industry as money and marketing driven, and fails to show healthcare’s interest in patient well-being and care.
Sound familiar? Of course. The healthcare industry is no stranger to negative press. A drug may be a blockbuster one day and tolled as a public health concern the next. News reporters may focus on Pharma’s annual sales and its executives’ salaries while failing to share R&D costs. Or, as is often common, the media may use an isolated, heartbreaking, or sensationalist story to paint a picture of healthcare as a whole.

Turner goes on to lament the lack of acknowledgment of various positive actions by the healthcare industry, before turning the post into a pitch for Google advertising products.

No one has ever assumed Google did not want to make a buck with its products. As a business, they are a search advertising company, first and foremost. We could suspect a Gordon Gekko-like undercurrent existed at Google, but as long as it didn't receive mention publicly, that was ok.

A followup post by Turner backed off her criticism of Moore's latest film, but brushed off the negative response from a number of bloggers:

Whether the healthcare industry wants to rebut charges in Mr. Moore's movie, or whether Mr. Moore wants to challenge the healthcare industry, advertising is a very democratic and effective way to participate in a public dialogue.
That is Google's opinion, and it's unrelated to whether we support, oppose or (more likely) don't have an official position on an issue. That's the real point I was trying to make, which was less clear because I offered my personal criticism of the movie.

It is very easy to misinterpret the tone of a written message, like an email or a blog post. Turner may be as well-meaning with her words in equal measurement with her lack of communication skills. That's not something Google should chance with future Health Ads blog posts.

Google should find somebody else to post to that blog. Otherwise, people will think of their recent health advisory council formation as a group of hired ad pitch-writers.

Some people might think that would be evil.

News Tags: Advertising, Google, Lauren Turner, blog, Health, Ads, Sicko

3 Comments

By Simon Peter Alciere (WPN reader) - Tue, 07/03/2007 - 10:57

They're trying to sell ads

It's not "evil" to blog your opinion about a controversial movie. And if you want to sell ads, you have to talk to your customers in a respectful way, understanding the advertising message they might want to put forth. Did you think that media outlets sell ads by treating paying cutomers like jerks?

By MacMcd (WPN reader) - Tue, 07/03/2007 - 16:05

For Sale to Highest Bidder: Journalist's Opinion

Most journalist are faced with offers from various industry interests to receive gifts or other compensation to write articles, or blogs which show that industry in a favorable light and we all know that Google advertising is available to whoever is able to pay for it.

I agree it is not "evil" to blog ones own opinion but as a journalist and editor of a health related news website I find it really interesting that Turner is so blatant about letting the world know that her opinion is for sale to the highest bidder.

She knows where the money is and does not even suggest that a few million individuals who have suffered because of the state of the health care industry in this country buy advertising on Google to present their side of the story.

Instead she uses the innuendo contained in the exact wording of major health care companies like:

"News reporters may focus on Pharma’s annual sales and its executives’ salaries while failing to share R&D costs. Or, as is often common, the media may use an isolated, heartbreaking, or sensationalist story to paint a picture of healthcare as a whole. With all the coverage, it’s a shame no one focuses on the industry’s numerous prescription programs, charity services, and philanthropy efforts."

By "News reporters" she means journalists who are reporting facts including R&D cost figures that are inflated and often include a large percentage of end user advertising expenses and the existence of prescription programs, charity services and philanthropy efforts which are only available to some of the very poorest of the population and not to millions of Americans who are covered by inadequate insurance programs.

Turner is practicing the world's oldest profession by standing on the street corner of her Google blog, looking very seductive, and saying to the health insurance industry:

"Hey, big spender. If you give me some money I will spend my time with you and tell you how great you are. I'll say anything you want if you pay me."

By Dave (WPN reader) - Thu, 07/05/2007 - 11:52

If the lady's pitch for

If the lady's pitch for Google advertising was so blatant then why didn't you include that in the excerpt. I think you just don't like her opinion therefore you insinuate she is a whore. Thank God we have Big pharmaceutical that stands ready to cure the world's diseases. More power to Turner for counterbalancing the yellow journalism coming from Moore and his ilk.