Escalating regulations, rapid-fire social media accountability and fears of lawsuits are forcing manufacturers to shift their labeling from maximum saleability to maximum “failability.”

At least in some cases. A recent report in the Winston-Salem Journal about proposed Food and Drug Administration (FDA) warning labels on cigarettes featuring cadavers, diseased lungs and gums and smoke drifting around an infant, suggests the strategy could falter.

The article notes that the move could “strike some people as manipulative, a reaction that could backfire on the attempt to steer individuals away from smoking. The study on the effectiveness of graphic warnings being recommended by the Food and Drug Administration was published online February 22 by University of Illinois researchers at the journal Communication Research…“[the] goal was measuring whether individuals felt their behavioral freedom — also known as psychological reactance — was being threatened by a requirement for graphic warnings on cigarette packaging.”

The article continues, “‘The perception that the message or source is trying to manipulate you – in this case [scare] you into cessation or maintaining prevention – is heavily tied to reactance and is part of the broader theory of reactance,’ said [lead researcher Nicole] LaVoie…‘The more reactant someone is, the more likely they are to attempt to restore their freedom, which they feel has been threatened by a manipulative message,’ LaVoie said. In the graphic warnings label study, the researchers said ‘participants did not like the images – reactance was high for all participants exposed to them.’”

Bottom line, at least in this case, is that graphic warnings may drive more people to “rebel” and buy the product.

Elsewhere, however, negative content indeed can hamper sales. According to CNN, the “FDA mandates new warnings, new data for Essure contraceptive device.”  The March report states, “The US Food and Drug Administration said it will require a new ‘black box warning’ label for Essure, an implantable permanent contraceptive device. A black box warning in the labeling of products is ‘designed to call attention to serious or life-threatening risks,’ according to the FDA website…more than 5,000 women filed grievances with the FDA between November 2002 and May 2015, complaining of unintended pregnancies, miscarriages, stillbirths and severe pain and bleeding after an Essure implantation.”

Then, there’s a Law360.com account of how the antidepressant Paxil may have to include suicide warnings on its label. In a case slated to go to trial in September, plaintiff  Wendy Dolin claimed that her husband committed suicide after taking a generic form of the drug. Notes the report, “In this case, Dolin claimed GSK should have warned on Paxil’s label that the drug had posed a risk of suicidality among adult patients.”

Given that labels likely will be tasked with ever-increasing negative disclosures, what do companies do to mitigate impact?
1. Make the non-warning portion of the label non-salesy and low-key. This may be sound counterintuitive, but think about it. You’ve got a label with a very limited opportunity to grab attention. If consumers see a highly-promotional message coupled with the warning, it can send the wrong message – that the manufacturer is too busy hawking its product to care about the problems.

Yes, drug manufacturers can get away with heavily sales-oriented pitches followed by a whole bunch of warnings on TV – but their bandwidth is much larger with a TV commercial than a label. Even so, one has to wonder if some of their initial bravado, followed by a list of potential consequences ranging from cancer to death, doesn’t scare off many potential consumers. Perhaps a more sober, less salesy pitch would carry more weight – at least among some groups.

2. Use the label to encourage consumers to gather more information so that they can make an informed decision. Aligned with the recommendation above, this tells the buying public that the manufacturer is invested in transparency and the well-being of its buyers. If specific research sources are suggested, make sure they are balanced and credible.

3. Use the label disclosure as the basis for a broader marketing campaign to discuss the issues/concerns/warnings in more depth. Again, this shows sincerity and transparency while, if done right, providing a way for the manufacturer to advocate for its product without appearing defensive or unbelievable. Of course, all of this will require vetting through legal counsel.

In all of this, be realistic. Tobacco companies will be highly unlikely to find substantive grounds for health claims. In contrast, such products like long-established antidepressants, which the public typically doesn’t hear about when they do their job, may have a positive story to tell.

There’s nothing to suggest that regulations and required disclosures will do anything but increase, so affected product manufacturers must do the best they can with the hand they’re dealt.



Mark Lusky is a marketing communications professional who has worked with Lightning Labels, an all-digital custom label printer in Denver, CO, USA, since 2008. Find Lightning Labels on Facebook for special offers and label printing news.