Why did Pfizer choose the Texas Rangers’ Rafael Palmeiro to pitch Viagra? He says he doesn’t need pills to get erect.
He recently signed a 5-year contract for $45 million, so I think it’s safe to say he’s not hard up for money. Why would he agree to humiliate himself for a product he supposedly doesn’t need? Surely, his teammates will never let him live this down.
And why did Pfizer pick him as a replacement for Bob Dole. Couldn’t they have used some other flaccid-pened Republican- plenty to choose from no doubt- to endorse Viagra?
BTW, he says that he’s doing the commercials as a public service to all those guys out there who have diabetes or heart conditions and who might not think it was “macho” to take Viagra.
If Pfizer could only land Bill Clinton to an endorsement deal…
Seriously though, Phizer has taken great strides in mainstreaming their product. The praise for it is high (approaching “miracle drug” status). And they are doing a good job of marketing to a potential customer base whom, in all likelihood, would be repeat buyers.
Cynic checks in here. I don’t think it’s a great secret that some guys are using viagra for fun. Not because they are impotent, but because it enhances an evening of sex for them. Whether Pfizer “approves” of such a use, they are not unmindful of it. If some active, strong, young guy says he just uses it “once in a while” some people are going to take that for a veiled allusion to recreational use of the drug. If that increases sales, fine. And when has corporate America - pharmaceutical houses included - refused an ad campaign that would increase their income?
Unlike Rafael, I pretty certain Mark Martin’s never said “I use Viagra.”
If Eli Lilly ever gets their Viagra-esque drug Cialis approved, it’ll be promoted by Paul Newman, with its logo on one of the cars he owns in the CART racing series.
I think the OP makes a few assumptions that are not completely fair.
Viagra may be used during times when, for any reason, erectile dysfunction occurs. These are not necessarily age-related, as intimated by the Bob Dole endorsements. Stress, illness, other medications may play a part in occasional dysfunction.
Your attitude seems to be that there is something to be embarrassed about when occasional erectile dysfunction occurs. This is precisely the common misconception that Pfizer is trying to combat. Whether it is chronic or occasional, young, healthy men may experience this problem, and they should not be stigmatized. Hence the ads with young, healthy-looking men in them and a tag line to the effect that “everyone needs some help now and then.”
Whether it is being used (or even can be used) as a performance enhancer is something Pfizer cannot control, any more than the makers of Robitussin can control whether someone buys their product and mixes it with vodka at a frat party. Just because some bozo in a certain demographic is likely to misuse a product is no reason to stop advertising to that group. Their use of a particular athlete or young, virile-looking male model is in no way unethical.
I think they should be commended for trying to remove the stigma from this condition. The idea that a man is not a man unless he can either get it up or else produce a child (which I never, ever understood) is so ingrained in our society that it has become a destructive parody of itself.
Is that the guy in the commercial where the announcer says something like, “Ask your doctor for a six-pill sample pack of Viagra,” and then the race guy says, as if it’s the neatest thing in the world, “Six? That’s MY number!”
Hey, wow cool! Six is your number, same as a six-pack of Viagra?? NEATO!!! :rolleyes: Probably the lamest line I’ve ever heard.
