President Michael D Higgins has described the proliferation of sports gambling advertisements as "a scourge". The Labour Party believes the time is right to ban them. Such establishment positions underline the importance of perception in what's likely to only become an even hotter topic.
The long-term outlook for the gambling industry, and those sectors benefitting from their sponsorship, could ultimately boil down to such ads being legislatively treated like alcohol advertising or viewed as a public health risk similar to tobacco.
One would see terms and conditions applied: the other involves a total ban.
Many involved in the struggle against addiction believe the scale of the problem justifies prohibition, the argument being that the pervasive betting culture technology has facilitated requires nothing less than treating the matter like smoking.
Comments by the President last summer focused on the human impact of addictive gambling on both individuals and families. He also suggested that “tokenistic” small print warnings and invitations to be responsible are feebly disproportionate to the scale of the problem.
Others will dismiss any blanket ban as a blunt instrument. It’s a divisive debate containing some familiar culture war resonances. Where there is near unanimity, though, is how the major gambling corporations have no one to blame but themselves.
For years, and armed with a transformed business environment allowing them 24-hour access to a mass and often unwitting audience, they exploited a wild west regulatory climate to make vast profits.
Any semblance of a nod to social responsibility was purely coincidental. Ruthless pursuit of the bottom line was the priority. Some of the calculation involved in exploiting the vast data accumulated on young people in particular doesn’t look so much cynical as sinister.
Too often the fundamental play was little more than a variation on the old street hustle of the first taste being free. Except in the digital age there’s no going home and closing the door on an incessant hard-sell.
New rules designed to reflect the reality of digital gambling rather than some musty stereotype of bookies standing on boxes have been drawn up and are part of priority legislation due for publication this year.
A new gambling regulator will oversee a ban on free bets, credit card betting, as well as the discredited VIP treatment employed to make losers bet more. Children will also be prohibited from gambling and treatment services will be available for problem gamblers.
Scrapping advertising reportedly isn’t on the cards. Instead a new code is designed to set out limits on the times and frequency in which ads can appear on media platforms. Momentum on the issue, however, appears to be going in only one direction.
The GAA doesn’t want to know about gambling sponsorship. In 2018 it implemented a complete ban on sponsorship by gambling firms. The Gaelic Players Association have lobbied for the outlawing of gambling advertisements by broadcasters during matches.
Irish soccer appears to be moving in the same direction with the FAI reluctant to have a gambling company as their sponsor. It is a problematic issue for others at the frontline of sporting sponsorship and perhaps for racing more than any other.
That’s because racing has always been inextricably linked to betting. One without the other is all but unimaginable. It makes for an easy fit in sponsorship terms. But growing social stigma around harmful gambling, and any consequent impact on advertising, puts the sport in a tricky position.
Perhaps that’s why there was jubilation and relief last month at news of a new sponsor for the upcoming Cheltenham Gold Cup.
Jump racing’s ‘Blue Riband’ race, one of its crown jewel attractions, had been without a sponsor since Magners ended their three-year sponsorship deal 12 months early. In the end the jewellery firm Boodles came on board in what was portrayed as a reassuring vote of confidence.
The length of time it took to organise, however, underscores how the climate has changed for racing in terms of major non-industry brand names eager to be associated with it. That leaves most sponsorship either from within the bloodstock industry itself or gambling.
The Cheltenham festival’s other three championship races are sponsored by gambling companies. Mainstream TV coverage in both Ireland and Britain is tied up in bookmaker advertising. It leaves a lot of racing eggs in the one sponsorship basket.
In the circumstances trying to diversify its commercial backing looks a reasonable ambition.
Nevertheless racing’s sponsorship fate is to a large extent in the hands of the gambling industry and how it is perceived. So it has a real stake in that industry, providing assurance about having learned the lessons of treating vulnerable customers as little more than marks.
Voluntary steps have already been taken by many firms, but not all, such as pre-watershed whistle to whistle advertising bans for live sport. It’s an encouraging step but self-interest alone should ensure it is just the first of many in efforts to stay on the right side of public and political sentiment.
Advertising works by association and racing has a lot of skin in the game of gambling’s image. It has been tarnished but not enough to make outright bans on advertising likely any time soon. That’s no long-term guarantee however.
Public opinion is fluid. The culture has veered towards quick black and white verdicts rather than shades of grey.
Arguing that gambling is high up the list of primal human instincts, and how out of sight doesn’t mean out of mind, won’t cut it if there is a perception of vulnerable people still being exploited by an unscrupulous industry. If that continues then all bets will be off when it comes to advertising.
Racing’s wagon is firmly, and lucratively, hitched to gambling. Attempts to broaden its advertising appeal beyond the usual suspects, though, look a sound each-way bet for the future.
