Networked narratives: Examining how Purdue Pharmaceuticals shaped public health policy and practice
Authors
Andrea Bowra, Amaya Perez-Brumer, Lisa Forman and Jillian Clare Kohler
Published
July 21, 2025
Abstract
In 1996, Purdue Pharmaceutical's (Purdue) launched OxyContin, an opioid painkiller, with the largest marketing strategy in pharmaceutical history. Literature has now established that Purdue's marketing of OxyContin was a root cause of the current opioid crisis, responsible for over 600,000 deaths in and beyond North America. Guided by actor-network theory, this study conducted a document analysis and key informant interviews (n = 18) to examine the processes through which Purdue constructed, mobilized, and embedded their marketing narratives in global health practice and policy environments. The data generated reveals Purdue's narrative, conveying that opioids are both safe and necessary for the treatment of pain, was constructed as a means of increasing the prescription of OxyContin, and therefore, shareholder profits. As reports of opioid dependence and overdose deaths began to rise in the early 2000s, Purdue added a second component to their narrative: that any misuse of prescription opioids was due to the personal failings of “drug addicts” rather than the company's product or actions. This narrative was then mobilized through recruiting key actors, including public relation firms and medical professionals, to reach physicians, policymakers, and the public. Through disseminating their narrative and embedding it in news articles, academic scholarship, and educational resources, Purdue successfully increased opioid acceptability and delayed policy responses to the opioid crisis. By embedding their narrative in public health fora, Purdue continues to have significant implications for global health policies and medical practices. By better understanding how Purdue mobilized and enrolled actors to deflect accountability from their corporate malfeasance, this study provides insight into how certain actors can exert disproportionate influence over regulatory, medical, and public domains.
To access the full publication from the Drug Science Policy and Law journal, please see below:
