Social Media Is a Tool, Not a Strategy

Earlier this week, I had the opportunity to volunteer as a judge for a regional DECA business competition for high school students. For those who are unfamiliar with the program, DECA competitions simulate real-world business challenges. Students are given a business problem, ten minutes to review and prepare, and then must present a proposed strategy.

A portion of the case my students were assigned involved current customer outreach. Part of the solution, they were told to propose included contacting these customers. Out of roughly a dozen participants, only three mentioned picking up the phone and calling them.

Every single one proposed using social media.

That stuck with me. It wasn’t necessarily wrong. Social media is dominant for younger generations. It certainly was revealing. It highlighted a broader shift in how communication is perceived. For many, social platforms aren’t an alternative channel, they’re the default. The phone isn’t avoided out of fear or incompetence, it’s simply no longer their habits or instinct.

The real issue, though, isn’t generational preference. It’s channel selection.

Choosing a channel because it’s familiar is very different from choosing it because it’s effective. And in few industries does that distinction matter more than in pharma marketing.

Social media absolutely belongs in the modern pharma marketer’s toolkit. But it works best when we are clear about what it is — and what it is not.

At its best, social media is not a conversion engine. It’s a context engine. It shapes what audiences know, what they expect, and what they trust before any direct interaction ever occurs.

This is why social media excels in early-stage awareness and disease education. It allows brands to reach patients and caregivers before they self-identify, before they enter the healthcare system, and before decisions feel urgent. Educational content, when compliant and thoughtfully designed, can normalize conversations around underdiagnosed or stigmatized conditions and help people articulate questions they didn’t yet know how to ask.

Social media is also uniquely positioned to reach patients and caregivers where they already live emotionally. Disease doesn’t exist only in exam rooms. It exists in support groups, comment threads, and late-night searches for reassurance. The role of pharma here isn’t promotion, it’s presence. When done well, social content can demonstrate empathy, reinforce credibility, and acknowledge the lived experience of disease without attempting to replace medical guidance.

For healthcare professionals, social media serves a different but equally important role: reinforcement. It can establish familiarity with disease areas, mechanisms of action, and emerging data so that in-person conversations don’t start from zero. A clinician who has seen thoughtful, educational content in their feed is often more prepared to engage deeply when a rep walks through the door.

This is where the false choice between digital and traditional promotion breaks down.

Rep visits still matter, immensely. They enable two-way dialogue, nuance, and trust. They allow for tailored conversations, real-time questions, and context-specific decision-making that no social platform can replicate. Complex clinical data, therapeutic trade-offs, and individual patient considerations demand human interaction.

The strongest pharma strategies don’t ask, “Should we use social media or rep visits?” They ask, “How do these channels support one another?”

Social media builds awareness, familiarity, and credibility at scale. Rep visits convert that context into understanding and action. One prepares the ground; the other does the work that only humans can do.

There’s another often-overlooked advantage of social media, listening. Patterns in engagement, comments, and shared content can surface misconceptions, unmet educational needs, and emotional friction points that formal research sometimes misses. These insights can inform messaging, content strategy, and even how reps approach conversations in the field.

The lesson from that DECA competition isn’t that younger generations are wrong, or that traditional methods are obsolete. It’s that effective marketing requires intentionality. Channels are tools, not ideologies. Each has strengths, limitations, and a role to play.

In pharma, where trust is fragile and stakes are high, the goal shouldn’t be to chase the newest channel or cling to the oldest. It should be to orchestrate the right mix, using social media where context and scale matter, and traditional methods, including rep visits, where depth and dialogue are essential.

The future of pharma marketing isn’t digital or traditional. It’s deliberate.

‍