The manner in which the message is presented is more important than the actual message. I get so angry about this argument or that argument. I am attempting to get by that, or over that problem. 

I just called my son to relate another great advertising experience via the tellie. 

The problem:  The opening act of the three part play presents someone who is having great difficulty in his attempt to clean the inside of his windshield. He simply cannot get to the 'tough spots'.

The cure:  The magic widget thingy is presented. And this great new invention is shown cleaning the inside of a windshield and getting to all the 'tough' spots.

The sale:  Just call this # and you can have this magic widget thingy for only $9.95 plus 'handling' and your windshield problem will vanish.

Now this is the funniest commercial I have seen this year. I mean the backwards robe thingy was ridiculous. I was convinced as far as shamwows are concerned.  I thank god sometimes that I have no money. If I had a credit card I would have ordered the shamwows.

Oh but the widget thingy. IT'S A SPONGE ON A STICK.  It is one of the dumbest things I have ever seen presented on television. I mean, that says a lot.

I mean I have seen the 'checker's speech'. I have witnessed the single worst speaker to ever occupy the White House.

Mad Magazine, Letterman, SNL, or even SecondCity has not really presented satires of advertisements that come anywhere close to this sponge on a stick.  And I have seen that guy doing Madden attempting to sell feminine products for the naughty bits.

But even the sponge on a stick, is not as funny as the drug commercials. I came across a site with this graphic:

http://giveupinternet.com/2009/03/05/pharmaceutical-tv-ads-side-effects-warnings-and-disclaimers-pie-chart/

Now a lot of the blue is government ordered. But the entire point is to sell the pills and not get sued.

So I just hit the google as they say to discover some pharmaceutical ads.

References

References

1. Fenter TC, Naslund MJ, Shah MB, et al. The cost of treating the 10 most prevalent diseases in men 50 years of age or older. Am J Manag Care. 2006;12(4 suppl):S90-S98

2. Data on file, Watson Pharma, Inc.

3. National Institute of Diabetes and Digestive and Kidney Diseases. Prostate enlargement: benign prostatic hyperplasia. NIH Publication No. 07-3012. June 2006.

4. Bruskewitz RC. Quality of life and sexual function in patients with benign prostatic hyperplasia. Rev Urol. 2003;5(2):72-80

5. Roberts RO, Jacobsen SJ, Rhodes T, et al. Natural history of prostatism: impaired health status in men with lower urinary tract symptoms. J Urol. 1997;157:1711-1717

6. RAPAFLO™ (silodosin) full prescribing information. Corona, CA: Watson Pharma Inc. October 2008.

7. Agency for Healthcare Quality and Research (U.S. Dept Health and Human Services): Quick Tips When Talking With Your Doctor. Available at: http://www.ahrq.gov/consumer/quicktips/doctalk.htm.

8. American Urological Association. AUA guideline on management of benign prostatic hyperplasia (2003). Chapter 1: Diagnosis and treatment recommendations. J Urol. 2003;170:530-547

9. Nickel JC. Comparison of clinical trials with finasteride and dutasteride. Rev Urol. 2004;6 Suppl 9:S31-9

10. Benign Prostatic Hyperplasia (BPH): A Patient's Guide. Available at: http://www.auanet.org/content/guidelines-and-quality-care/clinical-guide.... Accessed February 4, 2009.

11. National Institute on Aging: Talking With Your Doctor. Available at: http://www.nia.nih.gov/HealthInformation/Publications/TalkingWithYourDoc.... Accessed March 5, 2009.

12. Medline Plus Medical Encyclopedia from NIH: Enlarged Prostate. Available at: http://www.nlm.nih.gov/medlineplus/ency/article/000381.htm. Accessed March 5, 2009.

13. Shvartzman P, Borkan JM, Stoliar L, et al. Second-hand prostatism: effects of prostatic symptoms on spouses' quality of life, daily routines and family relationships. Family Pract. 2001;18:610-613.

14. Kuritzky L. A primary care physician's perspective on benign prostatic hyperplasia. Rev Urol. 2003;5(suppl 5):S42-S48.

15. Wolters R, et al: Lower urinary tract symptoms: social influence is more important than symptoms in seeking medical care. BJU Int. 2002;90:655-661.

16. Rosen RC, Giuliano F, Cason CC. Sexual dysfunction and lower urinary tract symptoms (LUTS) associated with benign prostatic hyperplasia (BPH). Eur Urol 2005;47:824-837.

17. Ponholzer A, Madersbacher S. Lower urinary tract symptoms and erectile dysfunction; Links for diagnosis, management and treatment. Int J Impot Res. 2007;19:544-550.

18. Straus SM, Kors JA, De Bruin ML, et al. Prolonged QTc interval and risk of sudden cardiac death in a population of older adults. J Am Coll Cardiol. 2006;47:362-367.

19. Nomiya M, Yamaguchi O. A quantitative analysis of mRNA expression of alpha 1 and beta-adrenoceptor subtypes and their functional roles in human normal and obstructed bladders. J Urol. 2003;170(2 Pt 1):649-653.

20. Murata S, Taniguchi T, Takahashi M, et al. Tissue selectivity of KMD-3213, an alpha(1)-adrenoreceptor antagonist, in human prostate and vasculature. J Urol. 2000;164:578-583.

21. Stafford-Smith M, Bartz R, Wilson K, et al. Alpha-adrenergic mRNA subtype expression in the human nasal turbinate. Can J Anesth. 2007;54:549-555.

22. Cialis® (tadalafil) full Prescribing Information. Indianapolis IN: Eli Lilly and Co.; June 2007.

23. Viagra® (sildenafil) full Prescribing Information. New York, NY: Pfizer Inc. October 2006.

24. Levitra® (vardenafil) full Prescribing Information. Kenilworth, NJ: Schering Corporation.

25. McConnell JD, Roehrborn CG, Bautista OM, et al. The long-term effect of doxazosin, finasteride, and combination therapy on the clinical progression of benign prostatic hyperplasia. N Engl J Med. 2003;18:2387-2398

26. Issa MM, Regan T. Medical therapy for benign prostatic hyperplasia--present and future impact. Am J Manag Care. 2007;13:S4-S9.

27. Wei JT, Calhoun E, Jacobsen SJ. Urologic Diseases in America Project: benign prostatic hyperplasia. J Urol. 2008;179(5 Suppl.):S75-S80.

28. Berry SJ, Coffey DS, Walsh PC, et al. The development of human benign prostatic hyperplasia with age. J Urol. 1984;132:474.

29. Hernández C, Estivill E, Prieto M, et al. Nocturia in Spanish patients with lower urinary tract symptoms suggestive of benign prostatic hyperplasia (LUTS/BPH). Curr Med Res Opin. 2008;24(4):1033-1038

30. Schwinn DA, Roehrborn CG alpha-1 Adrenoreceptor subtypes and lower urinary tract symptoms. Int J Urol. 2008; 15:193-199

RAPAFLO is indicated for the treatment of the signs and symptoms of benign prostatic hyperplasia (BPH).

RAPAFLO is not indicated for the treatment of hypertension.

Important Safety Information

RAPAFLO is approved to treat male urinary symptoms due to BPH, also called an enlarged prostate. RAPAFLO should not be used to treat high blood pressure. Only your doctor can tell if you have BPH, not a more serious condition like prostate cancer. RAPAFLO should not be used in patients with severe liver or kidney disease as well as those taking certain antifungal or HIV drugs. Avoid driving or hazardous tasks until you know how RAPAFLO will affect you, as a sudden drop in blood pressure may occur, rarely resulting in fainting. If considering cataract surgery, tell your eye surgeon you're currently taking RAPAFLO or have taken it in the past. Side effects include orgasm with reduced or no semen, dizziness, diarrhea, lightheadedness upon standing or sitting up abruptly, headache, swelling of the throat and nasal passages, and stuffy nose.

Now, the doctor has informed you with that rubber glove of his that you have an enlarged prostate. I like the important safety info here. I mean, there is a chance that if you take this splendid pill your prostate may reshape itself so to speak.  

The next line in the disclaimer says you should not USE THE PILL TO TREAT YOUR HIGH BLOOD PRESSURE. What the hell does that mean. Is that not irrelevant to the discussion. I mean it does not tell you that if you have high blood pressure, you should not take the pill.

I mean, why does it not tell you that rapaflo should not be taken FOR cataracts? Or hemorrhoids?

It certainly makes no bones about how dangerous this product could be for those with kidney or liver problems. Yeah and if you have HIV, forget it. 

But life is always a risk/benefit kind of deal, is it not?  So lets say you need to reshape that prostate of yours.  What kind of problems might you face?

Well, do not drive a car. So unless you live on a good bus line or some such, you will not be able to work unless you sleep at or near your office.

Back to the cataracts for a sec. Make sure you tell your eye surgeon that you are taking pills. Like a doctor is not going to ask you what pills you are taking?

Side effects include orgasm with reduced or no semen, dizziness, diarrhea, lightheadedness upon standing or sitting up abruptly, headache, swelling of the throat and nasal passages, and stuffy nose.

It would seem to me that flying an airplane is also out of the question.  Oh, and if you are really into breathing, this might be something you might wish to shun altogether.

This sponge stick thingy is looking better and better, at least to me. I mean comparing the risk benefits of the drug to a stick with a sponge on it....wow.

What is my point here?

Take a look at this Disclaimer for army recruitment:  http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AwS1bmggoZ0

After viewing it, how hot are you to join the Army?

The pills sell ladies and gentlemen. That is my point here. They sell.  When doctors give me pills, they do not read disclaimers to me. I mean, I am an idiot. If a doctor says take these pills, well I take the pills.

At least that is the way it used to be. Now, with one exception, I will not take the pills. But that is me.

I found the following disclaimer from a pharmaceutical site, believe it or not:

http://www.wellspringclinic.com/privacy-policy.html

This site sold many drugs but I just examined these two:

Gastro 8 described as a stomach soother and colon calmer.

Immune Power: a supercritical neutraceutical

The reason I brought this particular disclaimer to the table this morning was because the entire site is tort free. Hahahaha. Reading the site could be hazardous to your health I suppose.

So 75% of these drug commercials are disclaimers and yet these drugs sell quicker and faster than pot in San Francisco. 75% of the advertisements consist of messages as to why you should not use the product in the first place. But billions and billions of dollars of pills are sold every month in country alone.

How does this apply to some recent interviews showing on recent cable news programs?

Liz Cheney

has made 22 cable news appearances in less than a month according to a recent Media Matters report.  I snipped this from MM:

MITCHELL: Has he rethought that? Was he rephrasing it?

LIZ CHENEY: No, this is something he has actually said for many years. There was a report in the aftermath of 9/11 that came from the CIA that Mohammad Atta had met in Prague --

MITCHELL: It was quickly discredited!

LIZ CHENEY: Well, let me finish. So, there was a report, and when the report was outstanding, you had a number of people in the administration publicly talking about the fact that there could have been a connection in terms of the Mohammad Atta meeting. Once it became clear that the report didn't hold up, he and others in the administration were out publicly saying that and there's been a real attempt in my view to blur the distinction. He has not said that there is a connection between Saddam Hussein and 9/11.

Media Matters continues to demonstrate that Liz Cheney and her father (hell, include mommy cheney also) and incorrect in their assessment of things.

She's correct that there's been a real effort to blur the distinction! ..... If you are looking for evidence of this, well, heck! Let's take a look at the 2002 Joint Resolution to Authorize the use of United States Armed Forces Against Iraq. In plain English, it says:

Whereas members of al-Qaida, an organization bearing responsibility for attacks on the United States, its citizens, and interests, including the attacks that occurred on September 11, 2001, are known to be in Iraq...

and Iraq. We all know this. There are two main reports. One from the 9/11 Commission and the other from the Senate Report.

I mean it is a waste of time to do anything but check out Media Matters and go on from there.

So why have cheney's numbers (polling numbers) continued to go up so dramatically?  I mean from a onetime low of 9 percent to over 30 %.

Well I conclude that the reason for the sharp rise in polling numbers is due to the following:

1.  Frequency of appearances from the cheneys. If you advertise a stick on a sponge enough...you will sell more sticks on a sponge.

2.  Where the 'appearances' take place.  dickyc will only sit with friendly people. he never swears. he speaks quietly and directly.

Liz will show up on Mornin Joke and Fox News. And when she does appear on CNN, she is interviewed by some courteous person.

3.  Liz keeps a notebook with her. She refers to it like it is some important source of truth.

4. Liz and her father are full of determination. NEVER, NEVER, NEVER GIVE UP A POINT. Liz Cheney loves to stop an interruption by an interviewer with the words: Now let me finish. And she never gives it up. No matter how stupid that point is.

Now here is my main point here.  The TV commercial will tell you that you may faint and fall down if you take a certain pill, you may be prone to filling your own pants that a two year old having difficulty with his toilet training, you may throw up an entire dinner on your kitchen table....

It does not matter what they say, a third of those watching are going to think about buying the pill.  My favorite disclaimer is:

If you experience a boner for more than 4 hours, it might be a good idea to call your doctor.

I mean here is some poor guy watching golf because he has not gotten one up so to speak for a couple years, and the tv is warning him that he might experience a woody lasting for more than four hours.

NOW THAT IS SALESMANSHIP.