Commentary
No Pharma Ads On TV? If That Happens, What's Next?
- by Wayne Friedman , Staff Writer, February 4, 2025
TV networks are bracing for possible new rules and laws with regard to healthcare/pharmaceutical TV advertising. But there might be more to come.
Estimates from Emarketer say pharma TV advertising represents 8% ($4.6 billion) of the $60 billion spent on TV advertising per year.
This continues to impact more live, linear TV networks -- and to a lesser extent entirely, with the streaming platforms. Streamers tend to have viewers younger than linear TV in general.
The median age on prime-time broadcast networks is 60 years and older.
National TV news networks -- which skew older than average linear TV networks -- could be affected the most, since prescription pharmaceutical advertising is targeted to older Americans.
Local TV stations in particular could be hit as well. According to a RTDNA/Newhouse School at Syracuse University survey, the average local TV station broadcasts around 6.6 hours of news programming per weekday.
advertisement
advertisement
The Trump Administration wants to take away pharma ads in other media -- radio, digital, and other media. Overall, Emarketer says pharma accounts total around $22 billion, representing 7.3% of the $310.2 million in U.S. digital ad spend.
Why eliminate pharma ads? Critics say promotions of medications don’t make Americans healthier and often are more expensive than effective alternatives. Other countries like New Zealand severely restrict ads.
In the pharma industry’s favor is that the U.S. has strong freedom-of-speech rules -- something the U.S. courts routinely back except in extreme cases.
In the pharmaceutical industry’s favor is that any effort to shut down those ads -- through executive order, rulemaking or legislation -- can be immediately challenged in the courts -- with a strong result in their favor. Nothing will happen quickly.
Still, if this happens, will the Trump Administration then pursue other industries that advertise on TV if those messages are considered questionable when it comes to making Americans "healthier?" What about the food industry .... and the vitamin/supplement industry?
Wayne Friedman is West Coast Editor of MediaPost. You can reach Wayne at wayne@mediapost.com.
Wayne, I doubt that the "pharmas" will be treated like the cigarette advertisers who also accounted for 8-10% of TV ad spend before 1970. They were banned from TV but the networks and stations recouped mainly by attracting more spending from other advertiser categories and by huge CPM hikes in the mid- to late 1970s. The pharmas may be forced to put out more detailed and, perhaps, longer commercials with better explanations of side effects and the like and they might be forced out of programs which reach large numbers of children--like some of the Disney fare. But that's probably about it.
Wait and see if Bobby Jr. ends up HHS secretary.
and cigeratte ads were replaced by liquor ads
?
Seeing Pharma ads who would take them with all the side effects they have in those ads makes me not want to take those meds. I like the older drugs/meds without the side effects. I wouldn't mind if the Pharma ads went away maybe it would make them less expensive in my opinion, but maybe I'm wrong on that theory.