Pharma marketing is an oxymoron.

Is "pharma marketing" an oxymoron, like "happily married",“deafening silence”or “bitter sweet”?

The phrase “pharma marketing is an oxymoron” is my favourite one. In the days that I was invited, I used it as GD topic for IIM aspirants, and then as an opening question to folks interested in joining my team in GSK. Now, on occasion, I use it to tease NMIMS aspirants during the interview.

Am I pessimistic, sadistic, or downright cruel?

It may sound provocative, but it captures an obstinate refusal to change within the pharmaceutical industry. As you know, an oxymoron is a figure of speech in which contradictory terms appear together — like "happily married", “deafening silence” or “bitter sweet.” Applying this to pharma marketing suggests a fundamental contradiction: that marketing, often associated with persuasion, consumer demand creation, and brand storytelling, clashes with the serious, regulated, and evidence-based world of medicine. Is this contradiction real? And if so, what can be done to resolve it?

The question I am trying to answer is why pharma marketing feels like an oxymoron.

Marketing in most industries thrives on emotional appeals, lifestyle imagery, and aspirational messaging. Pharma, however, is about health outcomes, scientific rigour, and patient safety. The ethics of influencing prescribing decisions through persuasive tactics — even subtly — creates a tension that does not exist in other sectors. In this context, traditional marketing language and strategies often seem inappropriate or even dangerous.

An unseen consequence of this is our refusal to see the doctor as the gatekeeper, and not our only customer. In consumer marketing, the end user is typically the buyer. In pharma, the doctor is the gatekeeper — not the end user. In recent times, even their role as the decision-maker is debatable. With information becoming available widely and for free, the lay man is much more informed than what we given him credit for.

This adds complexity. Marketing messages are filtered through a medically trained lens and must align with clinical guidelines, evidence-based practices, and regulatory scrutiny. This gatekeeping weakens the effectiveness of traditional promotional strategies.

Then there is the tendency for companies to work like law firms that also make medicines. Pharma marketing is tightly regulated to prevent misinformation and ensure public safety. Every claim must be substantiated, every detail scrutinized. Creativity is restricted, and brand differentiation becomes difficult. The result? Marketing that feels more like compliance than communication.

Many pharma categories, especially in generics, are filled with similar products offering marginal clinical differences. This leaves little room for meaningful differentiation. Without a unique story to tell, marketing becomes shallow — a race to offer better discounts rather than better outcomes.

In many markets, especially post-COVID, doctors are increasingly inaccessible to sales reps. Hospital and clinic policies, time constraints, and digital overload have eroded the traditional pharma marketing channel — the field force. If marketing is about delivering the right message to the right person at the right time through the right channel, pharma is struggling to deliver at all.

So, how do we change the narrative?

To resolve the oxymoron, the pharmaceutical industry must reimagine what marketing means — not as persuasion, but as value creation and education. Pharma marketing must evolve into education-driven engagement. Focus on the key word here: engagement

This means focusing on empowering doctors and patients with meaningful, scientifically grounded content — not just product brochures and samples. Storytelling still has a role, but it should be stories of patient impact, clinical progress, and disease awareness.

Instead of pushing products, pharma marketers must understand the real challenges of HCPs and patients. What are their unmet needs? What barriers do they face? What information do they value? Real marketing begins by listening. Not to your bosses, but to customers.

AI, digital tools, and omnichannel platforms can help pharma deliver relevant content at scale — but technology must be a servant to strategy. Not the other way around. I love it when clients call me and say "help me build a strategy to get 15 lakh Rx this year". Or "this is my strategy - see if digital can help". Or better still "build me an AI strategy powered by Gen AI". Nice!

Not saying it doesn't happen, but I am yet to see smart segmentation, predictive analytics, personalization and real-time feedback loops outside a ppt slide.

Finally, reps must evolve from salespeople to relationship managers and scientific liaisons. They should be trained in disease areas, fluent in digital tools, and capable of guiding conversations based on value rather than volume. The key is access through respect. Too much? Then don't get offended by my favourite oxymoron.

Patient voices are conspicuously absent in pharma marketing. By involving patients in campaigns — from awareness to adherence — companies can humanize their brands and build credibility. Patients are not just end users; they are storytellers and advocates.

“Pharma marketing is an oxymoron” reflects a deep-seated discomfort with the idea of selling medicine. But the contradiction arises only when marketing is equated with manipulation. If redefined as value-driven communication, rooted in science and empathy, pharma marketing can shed the oxymoron and become a critical force for good. The industry doesn’t need louder voices — it needs smarter, more human conversations. And that, perhaps, is the future of pharma marketing.