With the battle on fixed odds betting terminals over, the debate around gambling has shifted to TV advertising and sports sponsorship. This was given added fuel by England's relative success in the World Cup which led to high viewing figures on terrestrial TV.
No one can deny that there is a high concentration of gambling advertising around sport, particularly football. And some argue banning gambling TV advertising before the watershed, and stopping gambling companies from sponsoring clubs, would protect children and vulnerable people.
But I do not believe a watershed or the banning of sponsorship would be the most effective way of getting to grips with problem gambling.
Societies and governments around the world have grappled with how to regulate online gambling. There are many things wrong with the industry in this country. But one major positive is that the vast majority of it – over 95pc – is regulated by the UK Gambling Commission and pays a point of consumption tax to the UK Government. This is the result of sensible regulation, including the ability to advertise.
Countries that take a more restrictive approach on advertising still have a gambling industry and they still have problem gambling. Eight out of the nine "front of shirt" gambling sponsors in the English Premier League come from overseas – predominantly Asia – as a means of targeting consumers in their home countries that watch the games.
But because these countries do not allow advertising and it is not tied to a regulatory regime, they have no means to force these companies involved to improve their behaviour.
This is where the greatest promise lies in the UK. Fundamentally, we should use the carrot of being able to advertise on TV as a means to drive up standards across the industry. You cannot advertise on television in the UK without a licence from the Gambling Commission. So the standards needed to secure a licence should rise markedly.
With the rapid shift to online betting, it is my firm belief that companies should only be licensed in the future if they are able to demonstrate higher standards that make the most of technology to help customers.
This should include defined processes that identify likely problem gamblers, a willingness to interact with customers who show signs of harm and offer them tools to modify their behaviour – and in serious cases a preparedness to intervene with customers to stop them from harming themselves.
At Sky Betting & Gaming we have increased the number of interactions we have with customers who show signs of gambling related harm. These conversations, and the marketing campaign we have implemented to highlight them, has in turn markedly increased the use of responsible gambling tools on our platforms.
Most importantly, we have stopped a number of customers from harming themselves by returning sums of money they either could not afford or should not be betting with.
To take a recent example, during the World Cup, our risk and responsibility team identified a young customer had placed a large bet on Spain and Portugal to win their respective matches. After a conversation with that customer he decided he couldn't afford that bet, so we returned the money, and agreed a deposit limit. This has happened with a targeted number of other customers too.
We do not have all the answers though and will never over-claim. That is why we would support these standards being made uniform and legal requirements across the online gambling sector in the UK.
There are other measures you could also take to beef up the requirements to secure a Gambling Commission licence. We would, for example, support the Gambling Commission's intention to introduce an affordability test. And we'd like more help from the banks to allow vulnerable customers to block themselves from spending money with gambling companies via their bank accounts.
Finally, there is a legitimate debate to be had over the content of gambling advertising. The Committee for Advertising Practice issued new guidance earlier this year over the standards expected. But I believe all operators should be required to dedicate a proportion of their advertising budget to educational adverts on how to gamble responsibly.
We already spend a defined portion of our marketing on safer gambling advertising and would be relaxed about that being codified into law.
This is a debate I welcome. We should always keep a sense of perspective: problem gambling rates have remained broadly stable over the last decade and are low by international standards.
Being able to advertise our products helps create a more vibrant and competitive market for the five million people that enjoy betting on the football or otherwise gambling online, and who do so safely and without harm. This advertising helps keep sport on TV, particularly horse racing, and helps keep football clubs afloat.
But nonetheless over the years I have met people whose lives have been greatly harmed by gambling, and as an industry it is clear than we can and should do more to help the most vulnerable customers.
A watershed for gambling advertising, or a ban on football sponsorship may make for an easy headline – but other measures would be more effective to help the people who need it most.
No comments:
Post a Comment