Talk:Cialis blog controversy is major war of words

what is a Lilly ICOS blog? Context please. -Edbrown05 11:20, 3 February 2006 (UTC)

The context for this article is provided in the second graph: CialisBlog, which was last updated in November 2005, contains information on Lilly ICOS earnings reports, clinical studies and commentary from company spokespersons about Cialis. The blog was first mentiond in an October 2004 article in Pharmaceutical Executive focusing on pharmaceutical blogging.

Am I the only on who finds the title suggestive?

Not to be crude, but does anybody see what I see?

Edit

I removed "Seinfeld anyone" note for a more professional reference.

Possible Blog AD

Could this be an attmpt to advertise a blog? besideds there are a lot of typos grammer and punct. errors. I added cleanup. Jason Safoutin 21:01, 3 February 2006 (UTC)

I doubt it, seeing it made Brand Week, which I trust to be rather journalistically sound. -- user:zanimum

Revision

I've revised this article for style and content. Reposted February 3.

Clean Up

Is this article ready to be published? Does anyone have any more comments on it? If not, it should go to the main page.

Attempting to pull in correct links to sources instead of the base of random blogs --Orbit 01:24, 5 February 2006 (UTC)

Perspective on the Issue

Is publishing this story doing anything? While Cialis hasn't done anything agaist possible misuse of their IP it would appear, they also claim that they are not responisble. A few things occur to me.

• On possiblity is that this is a site used to redirect traffic from spam to present legitamte information as a method to make the spam itself appear legitamte.
• Who ever made/runs the blog is attempting to drive traffic to their site and raise attention.
• Someone is trying to stir controversy over this issue and possible defame Lilly

--Orbit 01:32, 5 February 2006 (UTC)

Or the owner of the Envisioning 2.0 blog is trying to drive traffic to their site... more comments in sources.--Orbit 01:47, 5 February 2006 (UTC)

Sources

Is Digg an accpetable source? It is a new aggergate service, and this story never made it to the front page from what appears in the search history. The user [1] only posted the Cialis story, nothing else. Also you can see that only 3 votes were posted for the story. Oddly enough the 3 other people that voted for the story have disappered from the Digg System. (Possibly due to vote stuffing, but that is speculation and would require talking to the people that run digg)

Also, [2] [3], the company behind the Envision 2.0 blog seems to be a recently created consulting firm, and I keep going back to theory that this is someone just trying to generate free advertising for themselves. --Orbit 01:47, 5 February 2006 (UTC)