Abstract
This paper is a review of research on harm related to gambling advertising, including practical options for regulatory responses regarding gambling advertising policy. Problem gambling prevalence in Australia more than doubled between 2010 and 2019, now affecting 1.23 per cent of the adult population (around 244,000 people). Australia has by far the highest recorded gambling losses per adult worldwide.
The review reports on 23 peer-reviewed articles and three grey literature reports, providing evidence that gambling advertising leads to gambling harm, through the following mechanisms:
M1. Gambling advertising stimulates harmful activity among gamblers.
M1.a. Exacerbates already existing gambling problems.
M1.b. Stimulates non-problem gambling to become problematic.
M1.c. Contributes to a positive attitude towards gambling (normalises).
M2. Gambling advertising entices people to start gambling and problems develop.
Further research argued that:
M3. Gambling advertising restrictions lead to gambling harm reduction.
It is therefore appropriate to consider the implications and options for potential regulatory and policy responses. To inform options, gambling advertising restrictions in Australia were compared to regulatory regimes operating across Europe, and to restrictions on alcohol and tobacco in Australia. Learnings from these jurisdictions and industries include that restrictions are most effective when applied broadly and across a range of media platforms, rather than narrowly (for example, limited to sporting events or television only).
Practical options to address the impact of gambling advertising outlined in this paper include:
• Strict option: prohibition on all gambling advertising and sponsorship. The strict regime was recently introduced in Italy (2018) and Spain (2020). This can be likened to the tobacco advertising ban in Australia and is recommended by academics and experts as the most effective option.
• Incremental (stronger) option: restrictions including (a) a 10:30 pm watershed on gambling advertising on broadcast, live-streamed, and on-demand platforms—that is, no gambling advertising before 10:30 pm, and (b) a ban on gambling advertising via social media. This would improve consumer protection, especially for children.
• Moderate option: targeted restrictions on inducements such as bonus bets.
• Other options: prohibition during all sport, or on children’s products, or requiring advertising content to be plain and include the chances of winning.
The review reports on 23 peer-reviewed articles and three grey literature reports, providing evidence that gambling advertising leads to gambling harm, through the following mechanisms:
M1. Gambling advertising stimulates harmful activity among gamblers.
M1.a. Exacerbates already existing gambling problems.
M1.b. Stimulates non-problem gambling to become problematic.
M1.c. Contributes to a positive attitude towards gambling (normalises).
M2. Gambling advertising entices people to start gambling and problems develop.
Further research argued that:
M3. Gambling advertising restrictions lead to gambling harm reduction.
It is therefore appropriate to consider the implications and options for potential regulatory and policy responses. To inform options, gambling advertising restrictions in Australia were compared to regulatory regimes operating across Europe, and to restrictions on alcohol and tobacco in Australia. Learnings from these jurisdictions and industries include that restrictions are most effective when applied broadly and across a range of media platforms, rather than narrowly (for example, limited to sporting events or television only).
Practical options to address the impact of gambling advertising outlined in this paper include:
• Strict option: prohibition on all gambling advertising and sponsorship. The strict regime was recently introduced in Italy (2018) and Spain (2020). This can be likened to the tobacco advertising ban in Australia and is recommended by academics and experts as the most effective option.
• Incremental (stronger) option: restrictions including (a) a 10:30 pm watershed on gambling advertising on broadcast, live-streamed, and on-demand platforms—that is, no gambling advertising before 10:30 pm, and (b) a ban on gambling advertising via social media. This would improve consumer protection, especially for children.
• Moderate option: targeted restrictions on inducements such as bonus bets.
• Other options: prohibition during all sport, or on children’s products, or requiring advertising content to be plain and include the chances of winning.
| Original language | English |
|---|---|
| Number of pages | 25 |
| Publication status | Published - 2023 |