As the prevalence of social media continues to rise, consumers are recognizing w

Question

As the prevalence of social media continues to rise, consumers are recognizing ways in which social media can direct them to better sources for purchasing.

As a result, businesses are now jumping on the social media bandwagon at a rapid pace, embracing social networks to achieve their marketing and business goals.
Identify one (1) of the major social media outlets and write a five to six (5-6) page paper in which you:

1. Discuss the four (4) components of a legally astute social media marketing manager who utilizes social media outlets for consumer transactions and how each component can mitigate the risk involved in doing business in cyberspace.

2. List and analyze methods of alternative dispute resolution and determine which would be most effective in resolving genuine disputes that arise with consumers who may make purchases from businesses that provide links via social media.

3. Since consumer transactions on social media can occur across state lines, determine how the federal government can best control these transactions.

4. Examine the three (3) branches of government and discuss which can effectuate the most significant impact on regulating consumer transactions via social media outlets. Support your decision.

5. Explain the agency relationship that exists on social media sites between the social media provider and businesses that utilize the site for advertising.

6.Use at least three (3) quality references. Note: Wikipedia and other Websites do not quality as academic resources.

Explanation / Answer

ANSWER

A full decade later, in 2009, FDA acknowledged the special nature of the Internet as a marketing tool, and expressed renewed interest in addressing use of the Internet for marketing communications. FDA even held a public hearing in November 2009 and solicited written comments through a public docket, promising that it would issue guidance in 2010. Over the past three years, FDA has been drafting multiple guidance documents to address specific promotional activities involving the Internet and social media. These guidance documents are apparently designed to focus on many questions for which the drug and device industry has been left without guidance, including how to deal with space limitations, fulfilling post-marketing submission requirements, online accountability, use of links on the Internet, and correcting misinformation. In his recent interview, Abrams stated that FDA has identified relevant issues, including, “using vehicles that have space limitations for promotion of prescription drugs, appropriate use of links, fulfilling regulatory post-marketing submission requirements of all promotion materials, and correcting misinformation on independent third-party websites.â€

We commend FDA for working on these important issues.

But as a practical matter, since the inception of the Internet, the FDA-regulated drug and device industry has been left on its own, without formal FDA guidance, to determine how traditional statutory provisions, regulations, and policies concerning advertising and promotional labeling should be applied to the Internet and rapidly evolving technologies. In attempts to ascertain FDA’s Internet and social media policy concerning product promotion, the drug and device industry has been forced to scrutinize individual enforcement actions against companies that have created and used Internet websites and social media for promotion of their products. Interpreting FDA enforcement letters can be a tedious process.

In response to the question of why it has taken FDA so long to issue guidance documents, Abrams pointed to the concern that technology, the Internet, and social media is constantly and consistently changing:

It takes time because we follow good guidance practices and we want guidances that are well vetted and really address relevant issues, and stay relevant for a time period. It would be easier to come out with a guidance in a shorter time that may not be relevant as technology changes. One thing we know is that we can’t predict it, but we know technology is going to keep changing quicker and quicker. So we want this guidance to be applicable, regardless of which technology platform comes in the future or changes that existing platforms may make in the future. [pharmalive.com]

But when asked specifically for an actual date when industry can look forward to formal guidance from the FDA, Abrams was less clear:

We are striving to make it as soon as possible. I’ll be honest with you. As soon as we’re able to issue these – we’re not waiting for a deadline or we’re not waiting for an event to occur. We are working very, very thoroughly and very hard – people are putting in extra hours . . . And as soon as we can issue these, we will issue them. We are as anxious to issue them as industry is anxious to receive them. So we’re not waiting for a deadline or a timeframe. As soon as they are ready and we are happy they are good products that are well vetted and will remain relevant for a good time period, we will issue guidance. [pharmalive.com]

Despite FDA’s assurances that it is working on multiple guidance documents, the drug and device industry is left in the same, familiar position it’s been in for the past two decades: anxiously waiting for formal guidance from FDA.

You’re not alone if you are starting to feel like one of the main characters in Waiting For Godot:

“ESTRAGON: I can't go on like this.â€
“VLADIMIR: That's what you think.â€

Related Questions

Navigate

• Browse (All)
• Browse A
• Subjects

Integrity-first tutoring: explanations and feedback only — we do not complete graded work. Learn more.