U. S. Radio (Jan-Dec 1961)

Record Details:

Something wrong or inaccurate about this page? Let us Know!

Thanks for helping us continually improve the quality of the Lantern search engine for all of our users! We have millions of scanned pages, so user reports are incredibly helpful for us to identify places where we can improve and update the metadata.

Please describe the issue below, and click "Submit" to send your comments to our team! If you'd prefer, you can also send us an email to mhdl@commarts.wisc.edu with your comments.




We use Optical Character Recognition (OCR) during our scanning and processing workflow to make the content of each page searchable. You can view the automatically generated text below as well as copy and paste individual pieces of text to quote in your own work.

Text recognition is never 100% accurate. Many parts of the scanned page may not be reflected in the OCR text output, including: images, page layout, certain fonts or handwriting.

cial can communicate rightful claims and product story with taste. A television commercial seems to invite the use of unappetizing anatomical (hai ts, more extravagant claims, and actors-not-quite-posing-as-doctors to the point where it jnst looks awful to the public , and maybe more so to an FTC. • Fits the drug marketing pattern. Radio is everywhere, in about 97 percent of all American homes and even follows us about in our automobiles. It is about as omnipresent as cold germs. The packaged medicine also saturates the country. Thus radio advertising matches both product distribution and the incidence of headaches, chapped lips, sniffles and other miseries. • Flexibility. Radio offers advertisers a chance to heavy up schedules quickly when weather conditions suddenly produce a rash of colds or when epidemic strikes. It offers the advertiser of remedies a chance to switch commercial copy almost overnight to meet the vagaries of health and weather. If ets or live copy are on hand in the studios of spot stations or networks, about 24 hours notice will tie advertisers' copy to the emergency. In both flexibility and exposure, radio and newspapers still offer the best quick communication in the country. Q. How can radio broadcasters get still more drug business? A. By better serving the industry, of course. Here's how: • Watch out for product conflict! It may seem reasonable to the broadcaster to air an announcement for a cough drop, and then, three minutes later, slip in a spot for a chest rub. After all, he thinks, they are not competing cough drop brands; one is an internal medicine while the rub is external. So where's the conflict? Well, it's there! Both products are cough-and-cold remedies. Simply avoiding brand conflict is not enough. Any commercials for any kinds of cold remedies should never be run back-to-back. • Work on local drug stores and regional drug chains. Sell them on using radio for themselves, for special sale days and the like. Investi U. S. RADIO/July 1961 gate what co-operative adveiiising plans the\ ma^ have through manufacturers. • An occasional public affairs program or just a spot dealing with public health, winter ailments, cold-inducing weather conditions, etc. creates a good atmosphere for remedial advertising. Or why not point oul in some editorial, that while apparels are up llili percent in cost, foods up 150 percent, housing up 72 percent— all between 1940 and 1960 — packaged medications are up only .-50 percent for the same period. Pricing is a touchy subject with the drug industry since the Kefauver investigations last year. They might appreciate some "voice in the wilderness" on their behalf. • Documentation. If radio ever gels over its inferiority complex and decides to go after more business than drifts in through the transom, it will have to come up with some solid documentation. In the case of proprietary drugs, radio needs to show what leaders in the medicine field are giving it business, and how much. Sitting on success stories doesn't help either. But this is radio's problem — not the drug industry's. Q. How big is the drug store business? A. In 1960, according to Drug Topics, national newspaper for retail druggists, 54,126 U. S. drug stores comprising 49,074 independents and 5,052 chains did a total volume of business amounting to over $7.7 billion. (This, of course, included prescriptions and also such "up-front" non-drug items as toiletries, candy, tobacco and ice cream sundaes.) It represents a $0.5 billion increase in sales over 1959. (For some idea of how the American drug store business has grown, total sales volume back in 1941 were $1.7 billion, according to Drug Topics. And as recently as 10 years ago, sales totaled only $4.4 billion.) Last year, prescription sales amounted to nearly $2.2 billion, while all other business ("up-front") sales came to slightly more than $5.5 billion. Per-store average of up-front sales for the chains was $303,624 neatly four times thai of independent drug stores where up-front perstore sales averaged $81,515. Up-front sales naturally include the packaged medications with the non-drug items. Foi a comparison of how specific cold remedy types of pa< kaged medic ines sell, see chart on page 19. Q. How big is the proprietary drug field, and what docs it spend on advertising? Continued on page 52 Personalities such as CBS' Arthur Godfrey are used by some drug clients. Others just "buy radio" to reach women. W. R. Hesse, Benton if Bowles president, sees drug industry future in "more specialization."