No items found.
What happens when a marketer who’s led powerful campaigns in fast-moving industries like CPG, retail, and financial services brings that experience to pharma? Erin Nocito, Executive Director and Head of Global Media at Amgen, shares how she’s turned healthcare's famously complex rulebook into a platform for creativity, purpose, and impact.
In this episode, Erin reflects with healthcare marketing leader John Mangano on the steep learning curve of moving into healthcare, the unexpected freedom that comes with working in a highly regulated environment, and the lessons she’s carried over from brands like Walmart and Dawn. She dives into how pharma has quietly gotten ahead of other industries in areas like data responsibility, and why connecting doctors and patients through better communication is at the heart of meaningful marketing.
From navigating regulations to seizing opportunities for innovation, Erin shows that thriving in pharma isn’t about working around the rules but embracing them.
Transcript:
John Mangano (JM): Welcome to Deep, the health marketing podcast. I'm John Mangano. Deep is the show where we explore how marketing improves patient health, with the people actually doing it. I hear a lot about how pharma marketing is different from other industries, and sometimes even that we're behind. So today I'm talking with someone who's spent much of her career outside of pharma — she's led successful campaigns in fast-moving industries including CPG, retail, and financial services, and is now bringing that experience to healthcare. I want to hear what's different, what's surprisingly similar, and where she thinks healthcare marketing needs to go next. I'm here today with Erin Nocito, Executive Director and Head of Global Media at Amgen. Welcome, Erin.
Erin Nocito (EN): Thank you, happy to be here.
JM: Great to have you. What makes our business so great is that we get to impact every part of someone's day — from their workday to what they have to do, to what they enjoy doing. Helping people's health helps them enjoy every other part of life better too. What do you like to do outside of work? What gets you excited?
EN: I'm a proud mom of a boy, so he's really the epitome of what excites me these days. We're just getting into the stage of his life with friends, sports, all the little activities that keep him busy, and I'm just trying to be there for as many of those as I can, enjoy them alongside him, and get to know all these new people coming into his life. It's genuinely special to get to see life again through a kid's eyes and experiences. I grew up playing tennis, played through college, so I don't play nearly as much anymore, but watching him start to play a little himself has been a lot of fun. So — some kid, some sports, and then some sleep. Sleep is definitely the next best thing after kid and sports.
JM: It's funny you say that — my daughter's grown now, but every stage was fantastic. I love skiing, and when she started skiing with me, it was the first time I realized: this is something I like doing that she can now do with me too. It stopped being just "doing the things she likes" and became something we could genuinely enjoy together. I imagine playing tennis with your son will feel the same way.
EN: Yes — and it also makes you realize how much older you've gotten over the years, but overall, it's a wonderful thing for sure.
JM: Absolutely. So — pharma. I think people might see me as a lifer in this industry, but I actually came from telecom and travel originally, and found my way into pharma through kind of an unusual path. I think everyone has an interesting story about how they ended up here. How did you find your way into pharma?
EN: It definitely wasn't a plan. Honestly, even my career in media and advertising wasn't the plan. As an undergrad, I thought I knew exactly what I wanted — I thought I wanted to go to law school, and thankfully got the chance to intern at a law firm. No offense to anyone who chose that path, it's a fantastic one, it just wasn't for me — good thing I figured that out early. I had a few other internships along the way, and eventually ended up at an agency working on Gillette blades and razors, right before P&G acquired Gillette. That was my entry point into media and advertising.
From there, I spent many years on the agency side, mostly in packaged goods, and spent a good chunk of time on the P&G business specifically, which was a fantastic experience — a great real-world education in marketing, since they're genuine experts in so many respects.
After a few more years on the agency side, I ended up connecting with Eli Lilly, right as they were building out a central media team with a specific goal of bringing in people with expertise from outside pharma advertising. I was able to take advantage of that opportunity — got a real crash course in healthcare and pharmaceutical advertising, but in a way that actively encouraged me to bring my outside expertise to the table. That felt genuinely empowering, and it was a great mix of learning curve and being able to bring everything I'd built up over 15 or 18 years into a new career setting. That was my entry into pharma.
JM: You've worked across a lot of different industries — what campaigns or experiences do you find surprisingly relevant to what you do now, things you never would've expected to carry over, but still lean on today?
EN: It's interesting — one thing I've really come to value working in pharma is that even on the most mundane day, and there aren't too many of those, you can walk away feeling like you had even a small impact on someone's quality or length of life. It's a genuinely special space to work in.
Looking back at my time before pharma — I worked on the Walmart account in retail for a few years, and had the unique experience of working on their store-opening campaigns. This was during the recession, when Walmart was in a fairly unique business position, and there were a lot of grand openings happening — each store getting its own advertising and media plan, ranging anywhere from 3 to 30 stores a month.
You'd literally get on the phone with the corporate team, but also the local store manager and whoever else they wanted to bring into the conversation, and go through the details of their specific media plan. You realized how personal this massive, corporate-level business actually was to the people running it locally — they genuinely cared which billboard, on which highway, got chosen for their plan. They cared about what their customers would see at every turn on the way to their store. It made you appreciate the human side of what could otherwise feel like an overwhelming part of the business.
And on the P&G side, I worked on Dawn dish soap — and while dish soap doesn't always feel like the most exciting thing to wake up and push forward every day, I got to work on the campaign about wildlife rescue, using Dawn to clean oil off animals' feathers and skin.
JM: Oh, I love those ads.
EN: We actually got to visit some of the wildlife centers and see the product being used firsthand, and it brought a real human, and animal, touch to work that doesn't always feel like it's driving that kind of impact. In those moments, you realize it's about so much more than sales — which is genuinely special.
JM: Both those stories really line up with what I've seen too — I've probably worked with nearly every brand in this industry at this point, and we all share that in common: this work is very personal. I've worked with clients who recognize they're not just reaching patients, but often very emotionally reactive patients, given their specific condition. They have to be careful, wanting to build confidence and hope around getting treatment, while also understanding that confidence isn't always there, because it's a genuinely tough condition to face. Your Walmart story is similar in that sense — it's about understanding that customer, in that exact moment, because that's where the real impact happens.
EN: Absolutely, absolutely. And I think when you carry that into healthcare advertising, that's exactly why connecting the doctor-patient communication journey is so critical. I think we can play a real role in giving patients the tools they need or want to communicate with their doctor, and vice versa — helping doctors understand what that experience is actually like from the patient's side too. There's a lot of importance in that.
JM: When you first moved into pharma, what was your initial reaction to how marketing is approached in this industry? It's genuinely unique.
EN: My first reaction was, "Wow, there are a lot of rules" — I think most people say that in their first year in the industry. But even with all those rules, it was actually pretty liberating, because you start to find real power and freedom in knowing you're impacting lives in a way you maybe weren't before.
That really came into focus for me during Covid. I was working on part of Lilly's diabetes treatment portfolio, and these were patients who genuinely needed to stay safe, needed their medication secured, and couldn't afford uncertainty about where to find it during that time. There was a real freedom in knowing you were doing that kind of work, because it let you see past the day-to-day, minute-to-minute meetings.
On the ground, though, there are a lot of rules, and a lot of stakeholders you have to bring along to make any decision. It requires thinking several steps ahead and being genuinely collaborative, because it's never just marketing or media — you have to bring legal, medical, and regulatory along for most of the decisions you're trying to make. Even with all that, it brings a real sense of freedom to the work, because there's a bigger purpose behind it.
JM: I used to work with Edwards Lifesciences — they build heart valves — and it was incredibly powerful. I never got to attend one of these events myself, but I heard about them: once a year, they'd bring in patients who'd received one of their valves, and the actual people who hand-built those valves would get to meet the patient carrying one. That direct connection — realizing, "I made this difference" — is about as tangible as it gets. But we see it in our own numbers too, in the data — at scale, we really are helping people, which is remarkable.
EN: Yes, absolutely.
JM: Where do you think pharma marketing specifically is genuinely ahead of other industries?
EN: This has become more and more apparent over the last few years — we've always had to operate in a world where sensitivity around gathering, using, and sharing data required a great deal of attention, for very good reason, and a great deal of conservatism, again for good reason. I think that's positioned us well, and in some cases put us ahead of the curve, as data accessibility and usage have shifted across the entire advertising and media industry. We already had some of the tools in place to handle that responsibility.
I also think, compared to other industries, we've always had to think about both ends of the spectrum — what are we saying to HCPs, and separately, what are we saying to patients or consumers?
That dual awareness isn't always as deeply built into other industries' work the way it is for us — the connective thread between, say, a sales team and a consumer isn't always front of mind elsewhere. So I think our industry has had to mature in thinking about that full spectrum of audiences, what we're saying to each of them, and how we connect that story across both. There's still a ton of opportunity there, but I do think we've built more muscle memory around that connectivity than a lot of other industries have.
JM: It's interesting, because we were probably the last industry to really get into marketing at all — I think it was really the '90s when pharma marketing took off — but in many ways, given the level of data we have, and how carefully it's protected, we're actually further ahead than industries like P&G, as an example. I have friends who worked there who'd say, "We basically invented marketing," and there's some truth to that — but I'm not sure they're as far ahead when it comes to using and protecting data as those of us who joined the marketing world more recently, out of necessity.
EN: I do think, as a healthcare and pharmaceutical industry, we've had to learn how to be more sophisticated with marketing and media data specifically — we've played a bit of catch-up there. But the infrastructure and attention required around how information and data is used and stored — that's where we've had a real edge over other industries.
On the marketing side specifically, though, I think we've had to catch up. For Amgen specifically, we've benefited enormously from great science, great innovation, and strong face-to-face connectivity with our professional and physician community. But the world keeps evolving, and we've had to accelerate how we think about reaching patients, especially in more competitive therapeutic areas, where more voices are speaking to our patients and customers simultaneously. The data flowing into and out of that broader marketing ecosystem is genuinely newer for us, and for a lot of companies in this space. That's where you've seen some of the separation between healthcare and other industries — but we're catching up. It just takes time; we've been a different kind of business for a while.
JM: If there's anything holding us back right now, what would it be?
EN: Great question. I wouldn't necessarily call it "holding us back," but I think there's still a lot of opportunity in giving patients more, and more valuable, information and tools. There's a growing demand, and has been for a while, for patients to own more of their own healthcare decision-making — to walk into their doctor's office equipped to drive the conversation. We know they get less time with their doctor than they used to, so helping them focus that limited time on what matters most is something patients increasingly want.
The more we can embrace that, and give patients disease-related and product-related information with as much granularity and specificity as they actually want, the better — not just for the business, but genuinely for patients and caregivers too. That's a huge part of our broader patient audience. I can speak to that firsthand, having been a caregiver for my father — it's genuinely hard to find good information, and the patient themselves isn't always the one able to do that legwork. So it's the patient, but also the whole community around them, who benefits from a broader library of disease- and product-related information, empowering them for those doctor conversations.
JM: Which is remarkable, because there's more information available than ever — I saw a stat recently that roughly 30% of all information online is health-related. Is the challenge access, availability, or something else we could improve?
EN: Great question. I think it's really about making it digestible and available exactly when it's needed. In so many cases, whether it's a patient or caregiver, they're not actively looking for this information until they're right in the moment of a decision, or preparing for a big doctor visit. Making sure that information is accessible, and building that relationship and awareness well before that critical moment, is essential — you can't expect a patient or caregiver to dig into a whole library of information right when they need it most. But if you've already built that relationship and awareness ahead of time, and then deliver the right, digestible piece of information at the critical moment, that's where it becomes genuinely powerful. There's a lot of information out there — it really comes down to the "where" and "how" that makes it actually useful.
JM: That lines up with some research we did earlier this year, looking at the real impact of advertising. Fifteen years ago, there was a lot of pushback that pharma advertising wasn't necessarily in patients' best interest, especially from HCPs. But what we found now is that HCPs actually appreciate it more today — largely, I think, because we've genuinely gotten better at the advertising itself as an industry.
It's genuinely helping people understand conditions better. I've never had RA myself, but even outside the pharma industry, I'd have a decent sense of what RA actually is, and honestly, it's not that uncommon — so if I were ever diagnosed with it, I think I'd move past that initial shock, denial, and fear of the unknown pretty quickly. As a population, the more educated we all become on these conditions through media exposure, the better we're able to process and absorb information when the moment actually arrives.
EN: Absolutely.
JM: When it comes to creativity in messaging — traditional or more alternative advertising — what's different about pharma, for better or worse?
EN: That's a tricky one. I think the perception, maybe fairly, is that industry-wide creativity in pharma hasn't always matched other industries. I don't personally work on the creative side day to day, but from what I know about what legally has to be included in our ads, a lot of that comes down to needing to fit so much required content into a small window of time or space. That's a real constraint, and I want to give the industry credit for working within it — it's genuinely not easy at all times.
I also think what we're often talking about doesn't naturally lend itself to being lighthearted — we're dealing with some of life's bigger, heavier moments. That said, I really love how a lot of pharma advertisers have started leaning into lighter cultural moments — sporting events, big entertainment moments like the Grammys or the Oscars — moments genuinely relevant to our audiences.
There's real value in bringing your brand and product portfolio into those moments — not hiding what your brand represents, but pairing that with a slightly lighter cultural context. That can strike a nice balance that's genuinely hard to achieve in an isolated 60- or 90-second TV spot entirely about the product itself. I really appreciate that a lot of companies in our space are leaning into that — it's a great way to tap into lighter cultural moments while staying genuinely relevant.
JM: It's such a hard balance when you're talking about health conditions.
The ads that get the most attention after the Super Bowl are usually the funniest, memorable for exactly that reason. In health, you just can't make light of things the way, say, a beer ad can. That makes it that much trickier, which is why I'm always impressed by pharma — even with one hand somewhat tied behind our back in marketing, we still find ways to be relevant and successful, participating in the broader marketing conversation, even with all the required ISI. I still don't fully understand why you have to say "if you're allergic to this brand, don't take it" — I'm still working through that one.
EN: My husband says the same thing — "if you're allergic to it, shouldn't you have already figured that out?" I get it, though.
JM: How would you know you're allergic to it if you never took it? It's very circular logic, but it's one of the real challenges we face. In the end, though, I think it's probably far more worthwhile than another beer ad.
EN: And I think we have to give our industry real credit over the last few years for pushing the envelope forward here. You didn't see nearly as many pharma companies participating in these moments before — being part of the Super Bowl, trying to be humorous or memorable in a slightly lighter way, or figuring out how to align meaningfully with something like the Oscars. That just wasn't part of most companies' marketing strategy. There's been a lot of progress in a fairly short amount of time, which is great — and hopefully patients are finding real value in it too.
JM: You started in this space right around the pandemic, and in some ways that might've been the best possible time to start — everyone was genuinely appreciative of pharma at that particular moment.
EN: Right.
JM: And in most industries, people ask, "Why does this cost so much? Why can't I get it cheaper?" I've worked in telecom and travel, and you always hate your cell provider, you always hate your airline. But in that specific moment, people really saw firsthand what pharma was doing, and understood it was going to make a real difference — not just for some small group who happens to have a particular condition, hopefully not us, but for literally everyone. That's genuinely remarkable.
EN: I actually hadn't thought about that specific angle before. I came in about a year before Covid hit, and I've thought a lot about finding real meaning in that work — but I hadn't quite connected that I also got to ride the early wave of more positive public perception of the industry. That's valid, and I hope we can maintain some of that. No industry is perfect, but there's so much good that comes out of the work so many people do every day — and marketing and media are honestly a smaller part of it. Think about the people actually researching, developing, and creating these drugs — the amount of blood, sweat, and tears that goes into what comes out of this industry is enormous. I hope that positive perception continues without needing another pandemic to bring it out.
JM: Absolutely — and hopefully it stays a rare situation, but when we do end up with a condition ourselves, we start appreciating the brand that much more, unfortunately having to be reminded of it that way. Hopefully we're spared that, either because we never have the condition, or because the brand gets us out of the place we were in when we did.
EN: Completely agree.
JM: What campaign, one you worked on, or just one that genuinely influenced you, in pharma or outside it, do you still think about today?
EN: That's a great question.
JM: I can give you mine first, if that helps.
EN: Sure, let me hear yours while I think.
JM: It's kind of funny — it's the example I always come back to whenever I don't immediately get an opportunity or campaign being pitched to me. I was maybe 10 years or less into my career, managing partnerships at AT&T on the data side. This was right when SMS, text messaging, was brand new. A UK production house pitched us on paying a substantial amount of money to sponsor a talent competition show, where viewers would vote for winners using this brand-new text messaging feature, if they happened to be an AT&T Wireless subscriber.
I ran the numbers — I'm an analytics guy — and the numbers just didn't make sense to me. I couldn't see why anyone would watch or care about this show. It was American Idol. I was, of course, proven very wrong. So whenever I encounter something I just don't immediately understand, I remind myself: "American Idol, John — you didn't get American Idol. Think about that before you draw any conclusions." That's literally the one campaign I turned down; someone else at the company picked it up instead, and it actually wasn't profitable for us in the end, so I wasn't technically wrong on the numbers — but I still remind myself: you don't need another American Idol. Just think bigger.
EN: That's a great one. My own example comes from my time on the Walmart account — I covered grand openings and back-to-school campaigns, which were fairly traditional from a media standpoint. But at that time, corporate responsibility, sustainability specifically, was becoming an important topic for a lot of companies. We ran what were called co-op promotions with select partners, all products sold in Walmart stores, and it opened up some genuinely unique opportunities — seeing products created from recycled versions of really popular items.
If I remember correctly, there was an ad about recycled Coke bottles being turned into t-shirts sold in-store, that kind of thing. Again, it was a moment where the purpose behind the ad was bigger than the ad itself. Several companies, whether pushed as co-op partners or already doing this work, were creating uniquely sustainable or recycled products, and it was genuinely motivating and eye-opening — it shed a different light on what could otherwise feel like a fairly traditional retail business and campaign.
JM: I'd guess the creative itself was pretty emotional to watch — probably made you feel proud. We don't get enough of that in our industry, honestly, because it's such a sensitive topic that you can't afford to get too emotional most of the time. But when we do land it, even occasionally, it really hits home. And even watching a campaign I had nothing to do with myself, it genuinely makes me happy, as someone in pharma marketing.
EN: Agreed. A couple of examples come to mind right now. One great one is Lilly's campaign around being a "medicine company" — I can't recall the exact tagline, but the messaging was really about health equity, that everyone should have access to good health. None of those ads were necessarily product-specific; they spoke directly to the idea that health equity should simply exist. Genuinely emotional in a way you don't often see in our category, and still highly relevant to everyone. There are more and more examples like that — our industry deserves some real credit; we've made a lot of progress.
JM: You mentioned equity in health — and I think that's an area where, as an industry, we genuinely try to ensure equity, but there's so much more we could still do. In some cases, legislation and targeting restrictions genuinely limit us. What's the biggest opportunity you wish we were pursuing in pharma, to make sure everyone, regardless of who they are or where they are, could benefit from and actually be reached by what we do?
EN: There are so many angles to that, many of which I'm not nearly expert enough to speak on fully — but through the lens of my own world, I keep coming back to the power of information, and equity in getting that information out there. On the marketing and media side specifically, that means making sure that when we have a product relevant to a large, diverse patient population, we're actually reaching all of them, with communication that's genuinely relevant to, and representative of, each group. It means making sure the channels and messages we choose are hitting each audience equitably, and arming them with real information — and making sure our websites and materials are accessible and easy to reach for everyone.
That's the role I think marketing and advertising can play in that much bigger ecosystem. Beyond that, there's the access side, the physician-education side — making sure doctors and nurses are prepared to speak to each individual patient the way that patient specifically needs. There's a lot that goes into it. It's genuinely complex to drive the equity that's needed, but I think marketing and media can do their part by making sure we're reaching those audiences, with the right information, when we're doing our job well.
JM: Great point. If you could go back to your younger self, back when you were weighing law school and other paths, what would you tell yourself? I know some early-career listeners tune into this show, so I'd love to hear your advice for them too.
EN: Be genuinely open to opportunities. For me, that's not because I felt like I shut myself off from things, but I think there were opportunities I could've jumped into more headfirst — like new-business pitches in other countries, with the possibility of relocating if we won the business. Being open to those kinds of chances is one of the real benefits of this industry, especially early in your career, when you can work across so many different products and companies. Being open is genuinely key, and I'd encourage anyone starting out to embrace that.
The work does get heavier over time, the longer you spend in any industry, so really enjoy those early years — learning, asking questions, and building that muscle memory around genuinely enjoying the learning process itself. Even now, on heavier days, the fact that I'm always learning, that things are always changing, is what keeps it exciting and makes it feel lighter. If you can build that habit early, it'll serve you really well throughout your career. So: have fun, stay open to opportunities, and learn how to learn — that's what keeps it exciting as the years go by.
JM: Excellent advice. And if you could go back five years, to when you were just starting in pharma specifically, what would you tell yourself then?
EN: Another good question. I don't think I fully appreciated the learning curve. I took the job excited, expecting to learn, expecting it to feel new — you don't take a new job without expecting that. But I think I'd tell myself to leave more dedicated space and time for actual learning, because there's a lot that's genuinely unique to this industry. That uniqueness isn't a barrier, and it doesn't make the work boring or less exciting — but you do need to learn what makes pharmaceutical advertising and marketing distinct, and once you do, you can move forward with much greater speed. I think I underestimated that learning curve early on.
JM: And that's on top of media itself changing so dramatically — linear TV, CTV — and I don't think it stops with CTV either; there's going to be even more media coming. We're all constantly adjusting, because you don't really specialize in a specific medium anymore — you specialize in reaching patients, wherever and however they consume media.
EN: Exactly — and that's the newness, the exciting part that makes each day interesting. That's honestly the part I enjoy most. So yes, leave space to learn pharmaceutical advertising specifically, but understand that learning is just part of every single day — it just looks a little different as the years go on.
JM: Absolutely. Well, thank you so much — this has been a wonderful conversation. So glad we got to make this happen.
EN: Great to see you, and thank you — this was great.
JM: This has been Deep.
