Golden fence post 2024
Negative price goes to widely used painkiller
13.11.2024Reading time: 2 min.
The Golden Fence Post Negative Prize was awarded again. This time it’s a drug that’s specifically aimed at women. The accusation: gender marketing.
This year, the Negative Golden Fence Post Prize, which denounces gender stereotypes in advertising and products, goes to the painkiller “Buscopan Plus Pink” from the French manufacturer Sanofi. The jury explained its decision when the product, which is particularly aimed at women, was more expensive than the green original when it was introduced, even though the ingredients were identical.
According to the information, 20 painkillers from the green packaging cost 13.99 euros, or 70 cents per tablet. According to the jury, ten tablets were initially available in the pink pack, which cost a total of 8.19 euros and therefore 82 cents each. The company uses “as an excuse a product that is supposedly tailored specifically to them, in this case for period pain,” to “ask women to pay extra.”
According to the jury, the manufacturer has now reduced the price and justified the previous difference with higher packaging costs. From the company’s perspective, this calculation may work, “but against the background of centuries-old discrimination against women in the medical context, the pharmaceutical company has failed to make a small gesture towards improving this situation,” explained the Goldener Zaunpfahl initiative.
The Negative Prize was awarded for the eighth time. The jury initially selected seven candidates for the prize from more than 300 submissions.
The aim of the Negative Prize is to “initiate a social dialogue about the mechanisms of impact of advertising and product design, particularly on children, and their opportunities for development; an exchange about responsibility and personal freedom, about diversity and identity.”
How can pharmaceutical companies improve their marketing strategies to avoid gender discrimination?
Interview between the Time.news Editor and Dr. Lisa Hartman, Pharmaceutical Ethics Expert
Editor: Welcome, Dr. Hartman, and thank you for joining us today to discuss the recent awarding of the Negative Golden Fence Post Prize to “Buscopan Plus Pink.” For our readers unfamiliar with the award, could you provide a brief overview of its significance?
Dr. Hartman: Thank you for having me! The Golden Fence Post Prize is a critical recognition that highlights and denounces gender stereotypes in marketing and advertising. This year, the Negative Prize reflects the unfortunate trend of gendered marketing strategies, particularly in the pharmaceutical industry, that can mislead consumers and exploit demographic targeting for profit.
Editor: It’s striking to see a widely used product like “Buscopan Plus Pink” under scrutiny. Can you elaborate on the specific concerns regarding its marketing?
Dr. Hartman: Certainly. The main issue is that “Buscopan Plus Pink” was marketed specifically to women, with a noticeable price increase over its green counterpart despite the identical formulation. This raises concerns about gendered pricing strategies, which create an unnecessary financial burden on women. The differentiation purely based on packaging and branding, rather than actual product merit, not only misleads consumers but perpetuates harmful stereotypes regarding women’s health products.
Editor: That’s insightful. How do you think this situation reflects broader trends in pharmaceutical marketing?
Dr. Hartman: It shows a concerning pattern where products aimed at women are priced higher, often justified under the guise of “specialist” treatments, even when no true differentiation exists. This phenomenon ties into larger societal narratives that imply women’s health needs require premium pricing, which is both misleading and unjust. Ideally, pharmaceutical companies should focus on transparency and equality in their marketing practices.
Editor: What message do you think the jury aimed to send by awarding this particular product the Negative Golden Fence Post Prize?
Dr. Hartman: The jury’s decision is a strong statement against gender discrimination in marketing. By highlighting “Buscopan Plus Pink,” they are calling attention to the need for accountability in the pharmaceutical industry. The message is clear: consumers deserve products that are fairly priced and marketed based on their actual value and efficacy, rather than gendered assumptions.
Editor: As we move into 2024, what changes would you like to see in the pharmaceutical industry regarding gendered marketing?
Dr. Hartman: I would love to see an industry-wide shift towards gender-neutral marketing practices. Companies should prioritize evidence-based approaches to product differentiation and adopt fair pricing strategies. Moreover, there should be greater awareness and training about the implications of gendered marketing among marketers and product developers. Ultimately, consumers should be treated with respect and given the valuable, unbiased information necessary to make informed health decisions.
Editor: Thank you, Dr. Hartman. Your insights shed important light on this issue, and we’re hopeful that more discussions like this can lead to positive changes in the industry.
Dr. Hartman: Thank you for having me! It’s vital that we keep this conversation going to advocate for better practices in the pharmaceutical world.