The deeper reason for drug ads on television

by Jon Rappoport

February 14, 2019

(To join our email list, click here.)

Television viewers are inundated with drug ads from Big Pharma. It’s a flood.

Have you ever heard of these drugs? Otezla, Xeljanz, Namzaric, Keytruda, Breo, Cosentyz? Not likely. If you have, do you know what conditions they treat? Highly unlikely. But there they are, splashed in commercials.

Why? Who is going to remember to ask their doctor whether these and other obscure meds are right for them?

What’s going on here?


If Pharma can pay enough TOTAL money for ads, for ALL drugs, and dominate the allotted TV time for commercials, it can control the news—and that is exactly what it wants to do.

Pharmaceutical scandals are everywhere. Reporting on them, wall to wall, isn’t good for the drug business. However, as an industry ponying up billions of dollars for TV ads, Pharma can limit exposure and negative publicity. It can (and does) say to television networks: If you give us a hard time on the news, we’ll take our ad money and go somewhere else. Boom. End of problem.

Face it, the billions of dollars Pharma is paying for TV ads are a drop in the bucket, compared with its profits gained from selling the drugs. The ads are a good investment. As a bribe.

Control the news.

There is another reason for the insane flood of TV drug ads:

By their sheer number, they convince viewers that medical drugs (no matter what they are) are absolutely necessary.

Hour by hour, viewers numbly watch drug commercial after commercial. The overall message is: To keep illness from your door, to cure illness, to alleviate illness, you must take these medicines. THIS IS LIFE IN THE 21ST CENTURY. You’re all sick, and you need help, and this is the ONLY kind of help there is.

The drug companies could invent names of fake drugs that don’t even exist, advertise them in a cascade on television, with the same intent. DRUGS ARE AS VITAL TO LIFE AS WATER OR AIR.

But what about all those dire warnings of side effects from the drugs? By law, the companies must include them in their commercials. Well, the companies have calculated that, on balance, the stark, front-line, unending message of DRUGS, DRUGS, AND MORE DRUGS will outweigh the warnings in viewers’ minds.

If the television audience is nailed with the idea that they can’t escape; that their health always hangs in the balance; that dire illnesses are always waiting in the shadows to strike; that the slightest ache or pain could be a precursor to a crippling or fatal disease; and drugs are the only solution and protection—they’re going to overlook the warnings about side effects.


That’s the approach. Pharma is blasting out 24/7 news asserting modern medicine’s central and commanding role in the life of every human.

It’s a gigantic and stupendous piece of mind control, but when did that ever stop tyrants from inventing reality for the masses?

Implicit in “ask your doctor if drug X is right for you,” is the message: “go to your doctor.” That’s the key. If the ads can put a viewer into the system, he will be diagnosed with something, and he’ll be given a drug for it.

So the drug ads are also promotions for doctors, who are the arbiters and the decision makers. Some kind of medical need (drugs) always exists—and the doctor will tell you what it is. And all patients should OBEY. Even if, in the process, they go broke.

Take the case of Opdivo, a drug that treats squamous non-small cell lung cancer. Cost? $12,500 a month. Patients on Medicare will pay $2500 a month out of their own pockets. And the result?

Wall St, Journal: “In the clinical study on which the Opdivo ad bases its claims, the drug extended median patient survival to 9.2 months from the start of treatment…”

The cancer patient pays $22,500 for nine months of survival, during which the suffering continues, and then he dies.

The ad isn’t mentioning THAT.

The ad relies on the doctor to convince the patient to go along with this lunatic program.

The Matrix Revealed

(To read about Jon’s mega-collection, The Matrix Revealed, click here.)

Jon Rappoport

The author of three explosive collections, THE MATRIX REVEALED, EXIT FROM THE MATRIX, and POWER OUTSIDE THE MATRIX, Jon was a candidate for a US Congressional seat in the 29th District of California. He maintains a consulting practice for private clients, the purpose of which is the expansion of personal creative power. Nominated for a Pulitzer Prize, he has worked as an investigative reporter for 30 years, writing articles on politics, medicine, and health for CBS Healthwatch, LA Weekly, Spin Magazine, Stern, and other newspapers and magazines in the US and Europe. Jon has delivered lectures and seminars on global politics, health, logic, and creative power to audiences around the world. You can sign up for his free NoMoreFakeNews emails here or his free OutsideTheRealityMachine emails here.

24 comments on “The deeper reason for drug ads on television

  1. Alexis says:

    I have enjoyed a lot of your recent articles! Regarding pharmaceutical advertising, I have found an interesting “antidote”: If you do your research on immune system damage induced by vaccines and correlate it with what the “blockbuster” pharmaceutical drugs do, you will see the real reason that vaccines are pushed at every contact with a physician, nurse, pharmacist and even optometrists. Vaccine “side effects” are really the desired, profit generating results of these toxic injections. How many “blockbusters” are immunosuppressives designed to “treat” (chronically, of course) the immune derangements produced, very consistently by vaccines and their poisonous ingredients? My educational background is in medicine, biology and nutrition, so if I dig deeply on the proposed mechanisms for the drugs I can (And any patient and literate adult could do the same) usually discern a rational biochemical connection between the damage done by a vaccine and the resulting drug treatment. I have a hypothesis: When ACIP meets and a “safety signal” for a vaccine is announced I think it is a prequel for the pharmaceutical companies about what sort of damage they can look forward to. This is why open and obvious conflicts of interest between vaccine makers and ACIP decision makers have not been addressed, I believe.

  2. gladiatoro says:

    Ask your doctor if this drug is right for you , but please don’t talk about side effects , pHARMa reps are trained to teach the doctors to only talk about benefits of a certain drug NEVER about unwanted side effects, remember that.

  3. The Watchman says:

    Excellent article Jon!!!
    Linked as usual at

    Unfortunately, I do recognize half of these drug names as they are bombarded on us 24/7. I don’t even watch that much TV, but they are in magazines as well. Not only is the plethora of different drugs amazing, it’s the so called diseases as well. We would all be on 70 drugs if we took them for all our so-called problems ranging from toe nail fungus to now bent penises (the latest one I have seen). I have to admit that my favorite is still the drug that you take, for when the drug you take for depression doesn’t work good enough for you. To me that doesn’t say much for the original drugs that they pushed on you in the first place: does it! What a scam!!

  4. Darlene says:

    What a great article, I must admit I couldn’t take reading it all. The part I did read was exceptional and right on point. I was harmed and disabled by a Fluoroquinolone Antibiotic. About a year or so ago I was on the phone all night long with another person harmed by the same drug. When morning came I knew not to go to bed. So I sat on my sofa with the TV on in a daze, just to tired and dazed to really watch anything. However the amount of Pharma ads resonated with my mind, they were 99% of the commercials played. I’ve always known Pharma pays the bills! Had I not been exhausted and in a dazed What I would have if I had watched TV would have been through the DVR, so I could skip some commercials. Every dog has its day. TV and the commercials are beginning to loose ground, most programs are only 10 to 15 minutes the rest commercials and people are leaving and going with other options. The standard of Television today will be a past thing like the home home, matches etc., Good riddance, what they allow during Prime time for our children to see is not at all right with me. My Grandkids are allowed to watch (while here) what i have recorded for them.

  5. Ryan says:

    Great article. I have been thinking the same thing about banning drug ads from television, and the USA is one of the only countries that allows it. There is another side of the story, and that is the drug ads are often sponsoring absolute garbage programming. “So many channels and nothing to watch” is because television and cable networks don’t have to worry about the quality of their programming since their paycheck from Big Pharma is practically guaranteed.

  6. Rod S says:

    I always wondered why I kept seeing an ad for a drug that supposedly helps “totally blind” people – on TV. Now it makes sense.

  7. metalmandave says:

    Years ago, after watching a commercial for Lunesta, which literally ended by saying, “Ask your doctor if Lunesta is right for you!” I decided that it might be just the trick for my chronic insomnia (which was largely the result of taking yet another medication for years and years). So I went to my doctor and asked her if Lunesta was right for me. She immediately gave me “the look” and then threatened to put me on a drug seeker list. I left and never went back.

  8. Jon

    You’ve identified one half of the “operation” superbly, as always.

    But there’s something else going on that you’ve missed. And it’s crucial.

    You’re older than me, believe it or not….but even I’ve noticed a dangerous “cultural shift” from the mid 1990’s. There has been a move away from pharama, a general distrust of drugs. You can blame alternative healthcare, the New Age movement or something wlse, but it’s noticeable, it’s present, it’s everywhere.

    I am not saying everyone is anti-drugs all the time, but, given the preference, more and more would prefer an organic or natural solution to complaints. Even ignorant parents are becoming “wary” of vaccines these days. I hear the “supermarket” chatter.

    If it is on TV it is “normal”. The TV can’t be wrong. The “experts” talk on there.

    That what I think’s going on. Pharma is trying to “validate” the drugs choice, make it “normal” (again).


    P.s. Note how many ads are aimed at parents of infants.

  9. truth1 says:

    I would say that “news” is you might say, the prevailing current and status quo. Anything from TV or the schools, the work place, papers, magazines and books, peers. Everything around us attempts to shape us and out thinking and many do not dare go against that current, so they go along, not because they believe, but because they fear and want to fit in and get along. Fear shapes most of humanity. The bold soul will always run into problems. I know a little something about that. Al those who oppose the current will require courage and must bear ostracism.

  10. Sean Thomas says:

    You’re wrong on this one, Jon. The ruling class owns everything of value in this country (drug companies, weapons, oil, and media). Drugs, war, finance, and oil are the business model. They must own the media to promote their profitable industries.

  11. Karl McGaugh says:

    I am sick of these huge corporations having vast sums of money to advertise. They need to be broken into smaller companies so competition is restored.

    • trishwriter says:

      I think that happened with Standard Oil, deemed a monopoly in the early 20th century, but broken up into smaller companies, with the Rockefellers and their investment cronies reaping the benefits.

  12. NobodysaysBOO says:

    the MAFIA has always been smarter than most thus they are called WISE GUYS!
    they use their extras money/influence to go into quasi legitimate business, their top choices are GOVERNMENT, Insurance, and DRUGS ALL DRUGS!!!
    WISE UP and just say GOTO HELL !!!

  13. anonymous says:

    Listening to all those side-effects will make you sick. Not listening will only make them more effective as subliminal suggestions. Mute the sound at least. Or turn the channel. I sometimes wonder if the kind of programs that drug companies sponsor are themselves unhealthy.

  14. Erika says:

    They are lowering the standard metrics of “disease as well. By that i mean they are lowering The numbers for what constitutes “high blood pressure” , “High blood sugar” etc to sell more drugs and destroy health.

    They did this with cancer too. The death rate per capita has remained the same throughout the decades. BUT they have convinced everyone that “early testing” has saved lives, when in reality, these are people who would never have died in the first place.
    The death rate from heart disease has not decreased either despite all their horsehockey medications and bogus interventions/

    I actually stopped watching most mainstream TV because i am sick of the peurile programming and i am sick of drug ads.
    (don’t listen to radio either.)

    They want to rent space in my head they are going to have to PAY ME for the privilege.

    • TPR says:

      @Erika, excellent info to know as, wow, I had never thought of that before! It makes perfect sense that the Medico+Pharma+Labs Industry would LOWER what is considered “NORMAL” test results in order to sell MORE “medical services,” drugs, interventions, “treatments,” etc.

      “They” don’t call us “Consumers” for nothing. They literally want to CONSUME us mind, body, spirit, money, possessions, etc. in one way or another.

      And the push for “Early Testing” for Everything, yes yes! That had been on my mind of late because I’d heard a lady I knew in the 1980s had died (1 year older than me). She was terrified even way back then of Breast Cancer & would have been exactly the type of person to go faithfully every single year for 30+ years & let “Big Rad” smash & RADIATE her breasts &/or take whatever drugs they would recommend. (I went ONCE & said, this is baloney, I’m NEVER doing this again, & never have. Ditto for annual GYNs. And now they have everybody duped re “Early Colonoscopies.” NO thank you.)

      I have no plans to be visiting any medicos for anything. But if I ever do, I will remember what you wrote re their LOWERING the NORMAL ranges in order to push drugs, so thanks for that!

  15. TPR says:

    Big Oil birthed Big Chem.
    Big Radio birthed Big TV.
    Big Chem birthed Big Pharma.
    Big Pharma & Big TV met & together they birthed Big Lawyer TV Ads. 😉

    Haha, a little humor there, but I did wonder if Big Pharma Ads & subsequent Injuries from their druggery birthed Lawyer TV Ads.

    I can’t recall the exact timing when things changed, but attorneys/lawyers were still not even allowed to advertise in any way except in phonebooks through the 1980s (at least in my State).

    Then I do recall Jay Leno (he took over Johnny Carson’s show in 1992) being often aghast, horrified, disgusted, & then mocking Big Pharma TV Ads & their rapid-fire-monotone “fine print Side Effects” warnings at the end of the ads. He would shriek, “WHO would ever take any of those drugs after hearing all THAT!” It was hilarious because it was TRUE.

    So maybe Big Pharma TV Ads came first in the earlier 1990s but by the latter 1990s I do recall Big Lawyer Ads on TV (which were equally as obnoxious as the drug ads & late night TV Used Car Salesman ads, lol).


    Great point (which I had not thought of) re Big Pharma drowning the TV with Ads to basically “buy the soul” of the Networks/Stations so Big Pharma could then also call the “shots” re the devolving programming. The CIA & Big Pharma must be connected behind the TV Screen, then, since the CIA is heavily involved in TV Propaganda as well.


    Lastly, FYI, Ted Broer mentioned your name & talked about your above 2/14/19 article on the 2/15/19 Hagmann Report radio program. Ted was on through the 1:35-hour talking re all kinds of health topics as usual, but he mentioned your name/article probably within the first 1/2-3/4-hour or so. Hagmann 2/15/19 Link:

  16. maidinamerica says:

    Thanks for all these medical articles and sources, Jon! It gets my blood boiling!! Just watching the commercials and the mind-control brain-washing is unbelievable! To think that the person that doesn’t qualify for medicare/medicaid and wanting to take the Opdivo med can spend $112,500 out-of-pocket for 9 months! But if on insurance, no worries- all of us will foot the bill for these over-priced calamities with our own health insurance and over-confiscated tax-dollars. You’ll note that all the “patients” in these faux ads have a really nice house, nice car, nice vacation or recreation spot, and a perfect family that remains patient, loving, and willing to cough up whatever it take$ and emotionally driven tavistock musical background to further inoculate any common sense out of us.

  17. Chris says:

    Why the media blackout on infanticide abortion laws? I get the focus on guns when the mass shooter is invariably on big pharma’s SSRI drugs. I get the avoidance of discussing ending our policy of policing the world bc Raytheon, McDonnell Douglas might stop advertising…Planned Parenthood, the biggest oxymoron out there, implicated in the federal crime of trafficking fetal tissue for major profit…crickets…MSM stopped pandering to awake individuals long ago.
    Is big pharma also lobbying for infanticide abortion laws? Somebody is and the MSM in this case wants nobody caring more than it wants ratings.

    • maidinamerica says:

      For sure P P and pHARMa are hand in glove in their mad-scientist gigs. I think we forget about the City of London, the privy council and the Royal Crown’s involvement of the demise of the US and investment in the chemtrail poisoning our air and water and ground and availability to Viit D. Also, in this article It lists 60 companies that fund baby murder and inside the article you will see 243 more companies that support 3rd party groups that fund Planned Parenthood. Baby murder seems to make the world go round: our utilities, our credit card, our clothing stores, and gas and oil and of course Starbucks, huge pHARma and your basic usual suspects. Very sickening. We can see why it is very hard to orchestrate change.

  18. G Michael says:

    Also, interestingly enough, the lawyers are right there with their own commercials. I have noticed that most of the new meds. being offered are, almost from the first ad, being sued for the side-effects. Some are quite severe and others are deadly.

  19. Mos Craciun says:

    A patient cured is a customer lost !

Comments are closed.