The Guardian bans all gambling advertising

https://www.theguardian.com/society/2023/jun/15/guardian-bans-all-gambling-advertising

by CaptainZapp • 3 years ago

225 80 3 years ago

Joe8Bit• 3 years ago

I'm interested in this line "Many media outlets are increasingly reliant on money from betting companies" as I'd be interested to know how reliant the Guardian was on this revenue. Is stopping this type of advertising a big impact on their top line?

I applaud the move either way, but stopping doing something that's 0.1% of your revenue vs something that is 25% are two very different things.

rvz• 3 years ago

They won't tell you, or give an exact figure, other than this nonsense:

Guardian Media Group increasingly relies on contributions directly from readers, rather than advertising, for its income.

Which is no wonder they 'seem' to be continuously begging their readers to pay. Now after this, I should expect them to be begging even more aggressively, unless someone is funding them grants or what not, since they are still not telling us something or giving an exact figure.

Either way, one-sided publications like the Guardian is hardly worth paying for regardless.

mnd999• 3 years ago

I pay for the Guardian and I think it’s easily worth the money.

zztop44• 3 years ago

The Australian operation of the Guardian has said recently that donations from readers are now more than 50% of the revenue. And they’re trying to increase that percentage further. Not sure about their UK or US operations.

qwytw• 3 years ago

Either way, one-sided publications like the Guardian is hardly worth paying for regardless.

There is hardly anything better left though and the Guardian is one of the very few independent major publications left which is something.

begging even more aggressively

So you prefer a paywall or them being reliant on gambling ads, maybe a rich owner who definitely has no agenda buying it would be the best option?

pjc502• 3 years ago

All UK newspapers are partisan, mostly to the right wing.

zzbn00• 3 years ago

I don't know about Guardian specifically, but marketing spend is a big part of what the gambling companies do: e.g. GVC spent about £500million on marketing in 2019 https://entaingroup.com/wp-content/uploads/2020/04/GVC-2019-...

brookst2• 3 years ago

Judging people and companies on motivations rather than actions is kind of a losing game. You can never really know for sure, and it’s easy to speculate in every direction.

autoexec3• 3 years ago

It seems inevitable since even when actions are the same, intent really does matter. An adult inviting a child into their home is an action that happens every day, but intent is pretty important.

We should speculate in every direction while considering the motivations of a person or company, and we should weigh the likelihood and potential costs of being right or wrong about our suspicions when choosing how to react to events. Blinding ourselves to motivations (actual or possible) is a losing game which will only make us easier to manipulate.

iso1631• 3 years ago

I doubt Guardian is as reliant as say Sky is. Betting is pretty much the primary driver of revenue for their sports coverage, and indeed football as a whole. It seems half of premier teams have some form of betting company on their shirt -- often aimed at those in the far east

Although I see that's on the way out

https://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/football/65260002

And good riddance too

https://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/65601190

fredley• 3 years ago

Sky as in Sky Bet?

https://skybet.com/

topicseed• 3 years ago

The Telegraph seems to get quite a bit of revenue from their gambling content.

An example is https://www.telegraph.co.uk/betting/casino-guides/blackjack/

It's just odd to have this on a trusted national newspaper. Feels very out of place.

nervysnail2• 3 years ago

Depravity.

carlosjobim• 3 years ago

If you run a successful blog or similar, you will start getting offers from gambling companies wanting to purchase advertising and articles. These are legitimate offers and they pay well - even if your content is very local or narrow, such as citizen journalism. Gambling is an extremely profitable business, and they want as many customers as possible. Expect their advertising to only grow.

manishsharan• 3 years ago

I was watching the NBA playoffs and I found that the numbers of ads from betting apps was higher than any other category. I don't think this is a healthy trend. Also unlike last year, this year we did not see any crypto ads.. so that's a good thing.

ghaff2• 3 years ago

I was in Boston last week and DraftKings sportsbook was plastered all over the place. I've also gotten mailings at home.

simoneau• 3 years ago

The Daily has a good episode on how online sports betting moves into one state at a time: https://www.nytimes.com/2023/02/10/podcasts/the-daily/sports...

khalilravanna• 3 years ago

They recently legalized sports betting in MA. My SO lives in the North End and even I didn’t realize until I noticed Boston go from normal ads to sports betting ads being everywhere in the city.

https://www.wcvb.com/amp/article/massachusetts-sports-bettin...

h2odragon• 3 years ago

There's those who view the insurance industry as a form of gambling...

blibble• 3 years ago

for the sellers of insurance: it is

but as a purchaser of insurance you're giving up a risk in exchange for a fixed loss, which is the exact opposite of gambling

ravenstine• 3 years ago

Assuming the insurance company doesn't deny your claim.

huhtenberg• 3 years ago

Went to the UK for a visit few years ago and the amount of gambling/betting adverts in public places in the UK was flabbergasting. The fact that every ad featured a macho dude with a buzz cut half-threateningly peddling his betting venue of choice didn't help much either. "Like an addict to addict, here's the brand I prefer" type of thing. This left a really bizarre and lasting impression for some reason.

pjc502• 3 years ago

This is one of the negative legacies of the Blair era, the expansion of gambling. On behalf of party donors.

(They nearly got away with taking a bribe from Ecclestone to liberalize cigarette advertising, but people spotted that)

secondcoming• 3 years ago

Yes, it's extremely popular here.

The US has a similar 'WTF' when it comes to pharmaceutical ads.

okamiueru3• 3 years ago

Not to mention political ads.

It's the most dystopian wtf moment I've experienced in my life. Dramatic music, documentary-like-voice as if about how someone will murder everyone you know, and the whole point is "don't vote for this person based on the feelings I just made you feel".

Goronmon• 3 years ago

The US has a similar 'WTF' when it comes to pharmaceutical ads.

The US is heading in a similar direction with gambling, if we aren't there already. Sports betting it feels like makes up half of the advertising and sponsorships you see when you watch professional sports these days.

JohnFen• 3 years ago

And, increasingly, gambling ads.

joveian• 3 years ago

I had a similar WTF when a local hospital (in the US) had a marketing "thank you for choosing our hospital" after I called to schedule a test. Get that BS out of the medical system.

doublerabbit• 3 years ago

Our anti-gambling slogan is: when the fun stops, stop.

If you're addicted there is no fun. And to stop, you can't stop. Kind of an ridiculous slogan don't you think?

CaptainZapp• 3 years ago

Well, it's like the booze industry's Drink Responsibly shtick.

They don't really have an interest for their best customers to drink responsibly.

Same as the gambling industry is not interested that their best clients stop. Regardless if the fun stopped or not.

zahma• 3 years ago

It is like that in France too, and it’s especially disturbing since it’s aimed at young people.

pornel• 3 years ago

It's not just ads, it's the "high street" where everything went bankrupt, except gambling and vape shops.

Veen• 3 years ago

And the money laundering places.

andyjohnson0• 3 years ago

It wasn't always like this. Until 2005 betting and gambling was heavily regulated, advertising was basically prohibited (even in bookmakers windows), and the types of gambling that could occur at betting shops and racegrounds was fairly limited.

Then the whole industry was deregulated by the 2005 Gambling Act, and some extremely predatory companies moved in to exploit the new space. The 2008 GFC resulted in a lot of high street shops suddenly becoming empty, particularly in socio-economically poorer areas, and many were converted into betting shops. I understand it used to be the case that banks and bookmakers premises had the same planning designation and so, as banks unloaded their high street premises, they could be converted to betting shops without requiring planning permission.

The present UK government doesn't seem interested in effective regulation, and the legal review they announced in 2021 appears to be stalled. Meanwhile the industry continues to create endless misery.

lost_tourist4• 3 years ago

Is there a bit of a plague of gambling addicts? I kind of see it here in the US with sports gambling and people buying hundreds of dollars in lotto tickets. Not quite epidemic proportions but it is bad, especially with men.

0898• 3 years ago

Laudable I guess. But it does seem relevant to note that The Guardian is owned by the Scott Trust, which is sitting on £1bn+ assets.

jmclnx• 3 years ago

Where I am, there has been talk of banning these ads statewide, but of course, that may be just a fund-raiser for the upcomming election. :(

mypastself2• 3 years ago

Weird that they should call it a “ban”, as though there’s a legal aspect to it, or as if it applies to entities beyond the company’s direct control. Aren’t they just stopping it?

Not sure if it’s related to the fact thay they’re excluding state-sponsored gambling from the “ban”.

constantcrying• 3 years ago

It is common in journalism to write total nonsense into headlines.

fknorangesite• 3 years ago

Nothing about the word "ban" requires a legal aspect.

mypastself2• 3 years ago

Apart from the vast majority of its definitions?

But the minority definitions are exactly why I added the “or” part.

cm2012• 3 years ago

I work on advertising and draw a hard line for myself: no promoting gambling or mobile apps that are mostly gambling. I think it should be legal to gamble but illegal to advertise it.

detritus• 3 years ago

Yup, with you. I've run my own wee concern for about 14 years and the only Gambling-related job I took on was helping a fairly desperate friend out with a very small something that utimately didn't come to pass, for promoting 'PaddyPower'.

It kind of amuses me thinking of all the contracts I might consider whereas jobs for Gambling companies are an immediate 'Nope'.

Such a nasty industry.

lupyro• 3 years ago

I'm all for the legalization of cannabis/gambling/alcohol/prostitution/etc. but I do believe that advertising for these industries are a net negative for society. We're all used to alcohol advertising by now but it's objectively just as bad as the rest.

stevenicr• 3 years ago

'We're all used to alcohol advertising' - I can not stand to see alcohol advertising in certain places where I know it should be trivial to block it - like ads in google news..

There are some regulations or standard applied to alcohol ads though right? And not allowed for in content / showing people drink it TV shows as well?

I am for free speech.. so I hate to say ban ads.. but I can see 'no sexy models pushing alcohol / gamblin' - perhaps they should be words only and no imagery allowed.. still want optout option for google news and similar.. nice if can be opted out at an ip level - seeing those ads on chromecast and other devices, meh!

autoexec3• 3 years ago

I think most advertising is a net negative for society. I'm all for legalizing the things you mentioned, but every one of them needs to be heavily regulated and a part of that should mean limits on ads along with where/when those products can be bought and enjoyed.

hospitalJail4• 3 years ago

I was(and might still be) a libertarian that believes in legalization of everything... But you get older and you see the effects of drugs, gambling, etc...

Humans have almost no control over the reptilian part of the brain, this is the part that keeps people coming back to drugs and gambling. (There is a book Power of Habit, my number 1 book ever, that talks about how that reptile brain works, I'd pay $100k for that book)

If humans have no control over something, maybe there is a case for big brother stepping in. But not if having a black market actually improves the condition.

shocks• 3 years ago

UK bookies are evil. It’s rather easy to win money from them, but they are extremely good at spotting smart money and will immediately limit your account.

If you have a long term account with a bookie, you are a loser. (in monetary terms. :))

iou• 3 years ago

Canada needs to do this, it’s out of control on every media avenue.

0xDEF• 3 years ago

The is significant. Gambling and football betting ads make up a significant percentage of TV, radio, and newspaper ads in Western Europe.

mock-possum• 3 years ago

man it's crazy to me that some people have so little self control, that the only caring option is the nuclear one, to simply never risk exposing ANYONE to the thing that these people are addicted to or compulsive about.

Like I can see a gambling ad without wanting to gamble, but other people have it SO BAD that the Guardian is avoiding showing me gambling ads, just to be on the safe side. it's shocking.

nsvd• 3 years ago

Addiction is hard to understand unless you're yourself an addict. Especially on an emotional level.

lacker2• 3 years ago

Here in California, the state government itself advertises gambling, promoting the California Lottery. I find this extra frustrating - my tax dollars are being spent to encourage dumb behavior by other citizens.

smugma• 3 years ago

It’s not your tax dollars at work, it’s the opposite. The CA lottery generates about $2B, 1% of total funds that go to public schools.

It encourages dumb behavior but brings in money for the state. Is it a net win or net loss… depends on how much the negative externality is valued—is lotto a gateway to more gambling or a substitute for other, costlier gambling?

There are plenty of people who argue that lotteries should be banned, which is fine, but that will result in fewer services or higher taxes.

WirelessGigabit• 3 years ago

Except it extract $ from the poorest in the state. People who need the money the most.

You don't see lottery signs in the rich neighborhoods of Los Angeles. You only see them in the poor ones.

So that money that it generates? We're still paying for that, as those people now need more help to get around.

And I say 'we', but I'm out.

lacker2• 3 years ago

The way I see it, California extracts plenty of money from its citizens via taxes. When they decide to extract this money via a lottery instead, all the overhead of the lottery is just a complete waste. That includes advertising the lottery and implementing the lottery.

stjohnswarts• 3 years ago

I guarantee your lottery makes many times over what it costs to advertise, so not a dime of your tax dollars goes into it. If you're buying lottery tickets then yeah a portion of that goes into it. think, Mark, think.

The Guardian bans all gambling advertising

Related Stories