Dr. Carran stresses the critical need for the gaming sector to make safeguarding young people from gambling-related risks a top priority. This extends beyond mere compliance with promotional rules. Although marketing for gambling has existed for decades and undeniably boosts participation and revenue, its capacity to impact adolescents is a significant worry. The UK Gambling Act, especially following its 2014 update, aims to find a middle ground: permitting advertising while strictly prohibiting anything that might be perceived as appealing to young demographics. Nevertheless, Dr. Carran contends that the industry should not use legal minimums as a shield. They have an ethical obligation to guarantee their advertising does not contribute to gambling issues, particularly among at-risk youth.
All trustworthy gaming firms should possess a comprehensive grasp of the promotional guidelines established by the CAP and BCAP, intended to guarantee responsible gaming conduct. These regulations are especially dedicated to safeguarding susceptible demographics, notably children and adolescents, from being subjected to or enticed by gambling advertisements.
Nevertheless, the crucial inquiry is whether these well-meaning regulations genuinely succeed in protecting minors from the potential risks associated with gambling. The disconcerting reality is that there exists a considerable dearth of research explicitly investigating the influence of gambling promotions on young individuals within the UK. While we can draw certain parallels to studies on alcohol and cigarette advertising, or consider evidence from other nations, such comparisons have limitations. Ultimately, variations in products, societies, and regulatory frameworks all contribute to the overall impact.
The present rules show a praiseworthy attempt by both the sector and governing bodies to tackle the problems we face. However, although current protocols have mostly stopped the exploitation of at-risk demographics prone to impulsive behavior, my studies on wagering and teenagers in Britain suggest a key error in the thinking behind the present regulatory structure. This error is the idea that it’s feasible to totally divide material that attracts grown-ups from that which holds no interest for youths, or that contact can be successfully controlled through scheduling limits.
Except maybe for very young pre-teen children, there’s no proof to back up these ideas, which ultimately seem unsustainable. Time and watershed limits are simply not a real obstacle to exposure for teens. The watershed only applies to televised advertising, and even then, its usefulness is lessened by the fact that athletic competitions attract a large teenage audience, with or without adults present. It is just as unrealistic to assume that teenage viewing habits are limited to pre-9 pm programming, especially with clear data suggesting the opposite.
Roughly 8% of youngsters aged 4 to 15 view television after their designated sleep time, with a portion remaining awake significantly past 9 pm. This nocturnal screen time truly negates the initial intent of implementing age classifications for television programs. It also generates a multitude of additional issues, such as concentrating a large volume of wagering promotions into a limited timeframe. Consequently, children are more prone to encounter these advertisements despite not being permitted to watch the associated programs.
Although age restrictions are highly crucial for younger audiences, their effectiveness diminishes when applied to adolescents. The United Kingdom’s Advertising Standards Authority (ASA) employs a method to determine which programs enjoy significant popularity among children and should, therefore, exclude gambling advertisements. However, this method fails to account for the frequent overlap in preferences between teenagers and adults.
Numerous television programs and online platforms intended for mature viewers also garner substantial viewership from teenagers. Certain adolescents even actively seek information regarding content deemed inappropriate for their age group, such as specific products or services. This convergence of interests between adults and teenagers presents a significant challenge when utilizing “appeal” to a particular age demographic as a basis for advertisement placement decisions. Adults and children do not occupy entirely separate realms; elements that resonate with adults often hold a similar allure for teenagers, sometimes even more profoundly.
Present gambling advertisement control strategies are exacerbating the issue. These approaches depend on grown-ups determining if material is enticing to children, but this is not how youngsters perceive these promotions.
Children’s information processing differs from adults. They are frequently attracted to advertisements intended for adults, even if we believe they are unsuitable. For instance, many youths perceive gambling advertisements as alluring, enjoyable, and thrilling. They may find them humorous or fashionable, and even connect them with attractiveness and status, despite regulations prohibiting this.
Furthermore, these regulations disregard the influence of celebrity endorsements and sponsorships, which are known to increase the allure of gambling to young people. Consider the frequency with which you encounter gambling advertisements associated with sports teams or well-known athletes – they are ubiquitous!
The most significant flaw is that these regulations fail to address the overwhelming quantity of gambling advertisements that bombard us daily, whether on television, the internet, or in print media.
Although gaming promotions consistently display the necessary caveats and age restrictions, their influence on adolescents remains apparent. Certain youths even express feeling inundated with these advertisements, leading them to simply disregard them.
The gaming sector must acknowledge that mere adherence to promotional guidelines is insufficient. They have a responsibility to consider the broader context and assume greater accountability for safeguarding young individuals from gambling-related detriment. A sincere dedication to societal well-being, beyond mere compliance, could actually prove advantageous for their operations. If individuals, both within and outside the gaming realm, perceive the industry’s genuine commitment to this matter, it could significantly enhance its public perception. This constitutes a mutually beneficial outcome that all parties should strive to achieve.
Dr. Malgorzata (Margaret) Karan, a legal scholar at City, University of London, recently concluded her doctoral dissertation on youth and gaming. Her investigation examined how young individuals perceive gaming, their actual gaming practices, and potential measures for their protection. She persists in her research on gaming, with a specific emphasis on the regulation of gaming promotions, the realm of social gaming, and age verification techniques. She can be contacted at [email protected]
