Researchers from the Institute for Social Marketing and Health at the University of Stirling have published a study that sheds light on young adults’ exposure to gambling ads in Ireland and how they feel about such marketing. According to the results, those aged between 18 and 34 are exposed to a large volume of gambling-centred marketing, in some cases on a daily basis. Respondents’ reception to potential regulations that would impose stricter restrictions on how gambling is advertised was largely positive, although some were against a blanket ban on betting ads.
At present, the Irish Government is working on establishing a range of laws that should make gambling promotions safer and less pervasive as part of its plans to regulate Ireland’s gambling industry. Current proposals include a prohibition on gambling ads prior to and after live sports events as well as a pre-watershed prohibition on gambling ads that will affect broadcasters. Previously, there were also plans to fully prohibit the offering of inducements, but the proposal was met with strong pushback from representatives of the gambling industry and was thus modified. The new rules dictate that inducements will be allowed, provided they do not target specific groups or individuals.
Some Young Adults Consider Gambling Ads to be Pervasive
A total of 16 young adults took part in the study, with half of them being high-risk gamblers, while the rest were determined to be unlikely to face issues due to gambling. They were all interviewed by members of the research team between February and March 2022.
Participants described how they were typically presented with gambling ads while browsing social media or watching television, with the frequency being high enough that some deemed marketing “pervasive” or even “inescapable.” This was reflected in how a number of participants were very familiar with the various types of promotions betting companies offer to potential clients.
They also noted that humorous ads often led them to view gambling as a fun and risk-free leisure activity, with some sharing that ads were effective in tempting them to wager more than initially planned. A conclusion was also drawn that ads served as inducements that affected viewers’ willingness to gamble in general.
Opinions were divided on the responsible gambling messaging that typically accompanies betting ads, but scepticism was definitely present. Vagueness was a common criticism, and some participants were left with the impression that the messages were promotional in nature. Respondents were also sceptical of operators’ intentions and described the way warnings were presented as “forced.” According to the research team, humour was not viewed positively either and was thought to “downplay the seriousness of gambling.” In contrast, messaging centred around family and mental health was described as “hard-hitting and thought-provoking.”
How Legislation Can be Improved
As far as how messaging could be improved through legislation, ideas included warnings having a prolonged duration and being present throughout the entirety of ads aired on television and radio. Advertisements that focused solely on gambling harm prevention and treatment were also seen as a good idea, and according to participants, such messaging should be left in the hands of the government as opposed to operators.
Participant reception to measures already proposed by the Irish Government varied. While some had a positive opinion of the 5-minute ban before and after live sports broadcasts, others saw the said restriction as too short. There were also respondents who were against the exemption of horse racing and greyhound racing from this piece of legislation. The pre-watershed ban was subject to criticism as well due to the fact that broadcasters often air sports events at night, while the prohibition will only last between 5.30am and 9pm.
Respondents also believed consumers should be able to opt-in to being targeted with casino and betting ads as opposed to having no choice but to receive such promotional material. Additionally, they agreed that companies should not be allowed to promote their products to consumers who have opted for self-exclusion.
- Author
Daniel Williams
