A few weeks ago, a good friend sent me a link to a short article from New Media Age (via Therapeutics Daily) about Pfizer’s roll out of “…a pan-European digital campaign encouraging people to stop smoking” using viral marketing (read: social media). According to the article…

The Serious Quitters’ Arcade marks the brand’s first venture into viral marketing. The games site is being pushed through Twitter activity, video seeding and a Facebook app based on arcade game Pac-Man.

Pfizer has appointed viral agency GoViral for the push, and Belgium-based digital agency Emakina for the site that will feature games and information on quitting.

Visitors will be encouraged to add the games from the arcade on their blogs. Chris Venn, European brand manager at Pfizer, said, “We need to be able to demonstrate that our campaigns have a certain reach and are worth doing and online lets us be accountable.”

It’s interesting to see that Pfizer is trying to engage it’s audience through the use of social media channels where their audience is (i.e. Twitter and Facebook). This makes even more sense in Europe, where smoking is probably more prevalent and more acceptable, especially among younger folk.

However, if the plan is to use these tools simply as a method to “re-direct” people to the arcade website, I’m not sure if that will work quite as well. Perhaps why they called it “viral marketing” instead of social media.

IMHO, a big difference between traditional marketing and social media is that the former really doesn’t take as much effort after the launch of the campaign, other than to monitor and analyze; whereas with social media, the big effort really starts at the launch, as the tools are designed to facilitate interaction and engagement in order to develop an ongoing relationship with the customer. And like with any kind of relationship, it takes effort, empathy, and regular communication in order for it to blossom and grow. A one time effort with no continuing engagement will lose the interest of the social media audience very quickly, especially if it’s just marketing/advertising in disguise.

OK, getting off my soapbox now… So, in addition to the use use of social media, I recently came across an article that announced Pfizer’s “…novel partnership [with Garmeem Bank] to explore sustainable healthcare delivery models for the developing world“. Here’s an excerpt from the article:

Pfizer Inc and Grameen Health, an affiliate of Grameen Bank, the pioneering micro-financing organization in Bangladesh that shared the Nobel Peace Prize in 2006 for its work to alleviate poverty, today announced that they will work together to identify sustainable models for healthcare delivery in the developing world.

The partners will jointly evaluate ways to improve Grameen Health’s existing healthcare delivery systems and primary care clinics in rural Bangladesh. At the end of one year, they will identify appropriate business models that ultimately can be replicated in other countries, addressing the needs of the 4 billion people around the world whose annual income is less than $3,000. As part of its commitment to the collaboration, Pfizer is dedicating key employees to provide technical and advisory support…

During the next year, the partnership will focus on the following areas:

• Analyzing ways to expand and improve the current low-cost micro-health delivery and insurance programs at Grameen Health’s 38 existing Kalyan clinics.
• Reviewing operating efficiencies and scope of services (e.g., telemedicine, mobile healthcare) at Grameen Health’s Kalyan clinics.

Graarmeen is well regarded in the area of micro-finance — a concept that is very “2.0″ in nature — so Pfizer’s support of this mission is very impressive and definitely goes beyond just viral and social media marketing. It’s a commitment to help improve healthcare in places that need it most. Very glad to see them jumping in on this type of endeavor as a key industry leader working towards more than making profits from Web 2.0 trends.