Ban gambling adverts?

km991148

CrazyFather1 wrote: »

Look at banning alcohol. Has this actually reduced alcoholics? anyone know?
Has it reduced the sale of alcohol?

What it has reduced is the ability of sports organisations like the IRFU, FAI to drive sponsorship deals which bring in money. The same money which runs clubs all over the country for young people to play in. Stopping them from drinking alcohol.

No big picture with this stuff from what I can see,.

I'm pretty sure they look at the big picture and have access to all the stats including harm reduction numbers, hospital figures, and the negative impacts on other industries (especially considering sports and the alcohol industries have powerful lobbyists).
You might not be looking at the big picture as closely (which you freely admit when you are asking for numbers).

dan1895

MrMusician18 wrote: »

A lot of sports will simply go out of existence without gambling sponsorship. I'm thinking snooker, a lot of European soccer leagues (including LoI)/quote]

How will the League of Ireland go out of existence without gambling sponsorship? There is only a handful of clubs with gambling sites as sponsors.

km991148

CrazyFather1 wrote: »

It is a cancel culture
Everyone is offended over everything these days
What happens when they have everything banned, then they will move onto sports
Oh rugby is dangerous, we need to cancel that
Soccer oh heading the ball is dangerous, we need to cancel that
GAA, what the f**k, need to cancel that

Nah, not buying it. It's easy to generalise every thing as 'cancel culture' (which is a problem in society, people spitting the dummy at every little thing from celebrities that say something by mistake to kk argue bodies like RTE).

I would always look for ways to change something before cancelling it, a d that's what this is - the idea of changing a system that is harmful for many- not cancellation at all.

CrazyFather1

km991148 wrote: »

Nah, not buying it. It's easy to generalise every thing as 'cancel culture' (which is a problem in society, I would always look for ways to change something before cancelling it).
This is changing a system that is harmful for many- not cancellation at all.

Has banning alcohol adverts reduced alcohol consumption or alcoholics?

That is the main question I would be asking

NIMAN

NIMAN wrote: »

If it puts an end to those ridiculously cringeworthy Paddy Power adverts, I'm all for it.

"The Emirates never sounded so good".

Wasn't funny the 1st time, let alone the 500th.

Same goes for Paddy Power underpants trophies!

I do like the adverts with Ruby!

El_Duderino 09

Gambling is very addictive in the same way that we are seeing that social media is addictive. And like Facebook and Twitter, they employ science to make it as addictive as possible. They make it addictive to keep coming back and betting small amounts so you don’t get any big shocks from losing but amounts.

The stakes are very low for social media addiction but with gambling they turn real money into tokens and you can flit them around. People lose out loads to gambling addiction and like most addictions, it’s mostly secretive.

I listened to a chat about the proposal and they said that more Irish young people gamble than in comparable countries. So it’s not just about people of legal age gambling.

They’re not proposing to ban gambling or even problem gambling, just a ban on advertising. I’m fine with that. Those who want to gamble will still do so. They banned cigarette advertising and it didn’t stop those who wanted to smoke from smoking.

CrazyFather1

km991148 wrote: »

I'm pretty sure they look at the big picture and have access to all the stats including harm reduction numbers, hospital figures, and the negative impacts on other industries (especially considering sports and the alcohol industries have powerful lobbyists).
You might not be looking at the big picture as closely (which you freely admit when you are asking for numbers).

If people can show banning alcohol ad actually worked then yes I would say ban gambling. Yet to see anything to say it has

What it has hurt is the sports organisations,

CrazyFather1

El_Duderino 09 wrote: »

Gambling is very addictive in the same way that we are seeing that social media is addictive. And like Facebook and Twitter, they employ science to make it as addictive as possible. They make it addictive to keep coming back and betting small amounts so you don’t get any big shocks from losing but amounts.

The stakes are very low for social media addiction but with gambling they turn real money into tokens and you can flit them around. People lose out loads to gambling addiction and like most addictions, it’s mostly secretive.

I listened to a chat about the proposal and they said that more Irish young people gamble than in comparable countries. So it’s not just about people of legal age gambling.

They’re not proposing to ban gambling or even problem gambling, just a ban on advertising. I’m fine with that. Those who want to gamble will still do so. They banned cigarette advertising and it didn’t stop those who wanted to smoke from smoking.

Would it not be better to take some of the money and teach young people about it, so stop as many as possible in secondary school. Teach them about gambling, how it works. etc

That would have a bigger knock on than banning gambling.

I wonder if AK will hang onto his greyhound? https://www.grireland.ie/results/greyhound-search/greyhound-details/?gid=AKAY%20FORTY%20SEVEN

km991148

CrazyFather1 wrote: »

If people can show banning alcohol ad actually worked then yes I would say ban gambling. Yet to see anything to say it has

What it has hurt is the sports organisations,

Sure, spin off another thread. You might be right, you might be surprised, but I think it's a separate topic.

I don't have the numbers to hand either, doesn't mean either of us are right or wrong. All I'm saying is I'm sure the powers that be did look at the numbers and took everything they could into consideration. It might even have been known that sponsorship would take a short term dip but they still went ahead as they were hoping to reduce overall harm reduction. Definitely worth of s thread I'd say.

dan1895

CrazyFather1 wrote: »

If people can show banning alcohol ad actually worked then yes I would say ban gambling. Yet to see anything to say it has

What it has hurt is the sports organisations,

If you think that banning gambling adverts won't work then surely you thing that advertising these companies doesn't work on the first place so what's the problem banning them?

km991148

CrazyFather1 wrote: »

Would it not be better to take some of the money and teach young people about it, so stop as many as possible in secondary school. Teach them about gambling, how it works. etc

That would have a bigger knock on than banning gambling.

Yeah, like they guy that came and taught us about drugs.. that worked out well.... :pac:

Also I don't think anyone is talking about banning gambling. Just cutting the adverts in order to make it less appealing or accessible.
You have no idea the amount of research that goes into making gambling more addictive (via betting machines in shops, promotions on TV, advertising types on all platforms).
Some randomer handing out pamphlets in school doesn't have a chance- it's real David a s Goliath stuff.

El_Duderino 09

CrazyFather1 wrote: »

Would it not be better to take some of the money and teach young people about it, so stop as many as possible in secondary school. Teach them about gambling, how it works. etc

That would have a bigger knock on than banning gambling.

Who has proposed banning gambling?

Lol it would have a big knock on effect alright. I’m not sure if you’re serious or not.

Have you seen the Paddy Power ads which don’t mention the product at all, it’s just a load of sports celebrities telling the viewer to gamble responsibly? If PP has figured out that they can increase sales by just telling peopep about gambling responsibly, then the gambling industry would be delighted with proposals to teach young people all about how to gamble responsibly. Priming the pump.

It might be covered in some kind of education on addictions.

El_Duderino 09

CrazyFather1 wrote: »

If people can show banning alcohol ad actually worked then yes I would say ban gambling. Yet to see anything to say it has

What it has hurt is the sports organisations,

If you found out that young people who grew up with fewer alcohol or cigarette advertisements went on to drink and smoke less, would that be convincing to you?

CrazyFather1

El_Duderino 09 wrote: »

Who has proposed banning gambling?

Lol it would have a big knock on effect alright. I’m not sure if you’re serious or not.

Have you seen the Paddy Power ads which don’t mention the product at all, it’s just a load of sports celebrities telling the viewer to gamble responsibly? If PP has figured out that they can increase sales by just telling peopep about gambling responsibly, then the gambling industry would be delighted with proposals to teach young people all about how to gamble responsibly. Priming the pump.

It might be covered in some kind of education on addictions.

Gambling was a huge issue when no TV or radio existed. Yet now we think banning advertisement is going to resolve the issue?

A proper education program, not by the gambling companies could work. Who knows.

But sure best just to ban everything and take advertisement money from sports organisations so they have less clubs for young people. Don't really think that is a great success either?

Esho

Yes, what a great free ride the gambling industry has had. The rise of gambling addiction is massive since online gambling is so easy.
Banning adds is the very least that needs to be done.
It also needs much higher regulation

km991148

El_Duderino 09 wrote: »

It might be covered in some kind of education on addictions.

Yeah, it should be covered all right. In some sort of cyberpsychology course that makes people aware of just exactly how the internet works.

I never saw the appeal to gambling. I'm grateful for that disposition.

km991148

CrazyFather1 wrote: »

Gambling was a huge issue when no TV or radio existed. Yet now we think banning advertisement is going to resolve the issue?

A proper education program, not by the gambling companies could work. Who knows.

But sure best just to ban everything and take advertisement money from sports organisations so they have less clubs for young people. Don't really think that is a great success either?

And so was sending heavies round for anyone that couldn't pay their debts, but the industry has moved away from that. Then there was probably a period of balance where gambling was advertised but not as accessible as it is now. Last 10/15 years it's went pretty far in the favour of the gambling industry, so these proposals are to level the field a little bit.

These things are always like a cat and mouse game. Sometimes one party gets ahead, then they need to catch up a bit.

The question tho that was asked at the start: why is it on Labour to bring this in? It seems (based in this small sample survey) that most people would be in favour of regulation.

El_Duderino 09

CrazyFather1 wrote: »

Gambling was a huge issue when no TV or radio existed. Yet now we think banning advertisement is going to resolve the issue?

A proper education program, not by the gambling companies could work. Who knows.

But sure best just to ban everything and take advertisement money from sports organisations so they have less clubs for young people. Don't really think that is a great success either?

Who has proposed banning gambling?

It wouldn’t resolve the issue - I don’t think anyone has said it would resolve the issue, have they?

It would almost certainly help reduce the size of the issue.

PHG

Ban it

PP and them are not funny. If you do well on their sites they don't ban you but restrict you to 10cent bets. I'm currently restricted from PP, 365, Ladbrokes, William Hill and 888 cause I made money out of their offers. They want everyone playing the casino games. If they can ban/restrict someone, then level the playing field cause they rarely ban someone for losing too much.

If you read the T&Cs of their apps you would be shocked. They can access your other gambling apps to see what bets you are placing!

I have no issue with people gambling but have an issue with how the industry is run.

Mike Murdock

TheBoyConor wrote: »

I think organised gambling is an absolute plague.

Every town across ireland is littered with grimey little bookie shops with men, mainly middle aged, gambling away their lives and drinking it away in the equally grotty pub next door.

There is not escaping the fact that the horse racing industry, and to a certain extent UK soccer, is largely built on the misery and at the expense of gambling addicts and their families. I know families that have no heating because of a husband who gambled every euro he can lay his hand on.

And online gambling is about the saddest existence I can think of.

Good riddance to gambling advertising. Dirt

Should we ban booze advertising too then?

After all, booze causes untold misery to families all over the country

Kermit.de.frog

Esho wrote: »

It also needs much higher regulation

Wasn't one of these that betting shops could ban problem gamblers?

That's how it was sold as action but then apparently the problem gambler themselves has to actually sign the form banning themselves!

So useless basically.

Whenever the govt claims to take action they neuter it be totally ineffective or absurd.

realdanbreen

Mysterypunter wrote: »

OisMcConville should be banned, he wants everyone else to suffer coz he lost his bollix, in his book he said he was in the car trying to find a few quid for a bet in the glove box. If he was a real addict, he would have sold the car and gambled the money. Same with that Wexford postman, on the TV and radio for the last few years making up fairy stories. Labour have done **** all for this country except provide, a former president who is a walking contradiction in Mary Robinson, a feminist who is best mates with rich Arabs, and also failed country when they were in coalition, and got wiped out. Thought they were a party of the working classes, but they have shown their true colours in the past few years. Lots of things should be banned, and the justice system should be overhauled before anything else, also public serve ts and politicians are grossly overpaid, but once again this kind of issue is promoted at the expense of real issues, it doesn't matter if advertising is banned, people will still do what they want.

I hate the way you sit on the fence on these issues!

jobeenfitz

I've had many of my accounts restricted and one, (William Hill) just closed.

I enjoy gambling, mostly Premier league football.

I'd agree with banning advertising but not banning gambling.

square ball

Gambling companies should be allowed to advertise. Divert a higher percentage of their earnings to educate young people on responsible gambling and support for people who overindulge.

I think we need to start teaching people personal responsibility rather than blaming everyone else. A person developing a gambling addiction is somehow societies fault, same with alcohol and drug abuse.

I enjoy a flutter and a few drinks every now and then but don't go nuts and spend every penny I own just because an Ad told me to.

How long before there is legislation proposed to make gambling illegal because Johnny down the road isn't able to exercise some self control.

km991148

square ball wrote: »

Gambling companies should be allowed to advertise. Divert a higher percentage of their earnings to educate young people on responsible gambling and support for people who overindulge.

I think we need to start teaching people personal responsibility rather than blaming everyone else. A person developing a gambling addiction is somehow societies fault, same with alcohol and drug abuse.

I enjoy a flutter and a few drinks every now and then but don't go nuts and spend every penny I own just because an Ad told me to.

How long before there is legislation proposed to make gambling illegal because Johnny down the road isn't able to exercise some self control.

You say "someone else's fault" as if it's the innocent ol' gambling company that is just trying to ply their trade in peace while conveniently ignoring the fact that they spend millions on R&D to make sure they get people hooked. Crazy amounts of money is spent on building the most addictive games possible. Money is spent understanding how the brain works and how it can be exploited.

Siphoning off a percentage for education.. it's not going to cut it really. That's why a little bit of regulation is being suggested to tip the scales back into balance.

It doesn't mean that gambling is next to be banned or any such nonsense (which of course won't work anyway as prohibition rarely does).

Besides if you are putting a few quid on with a pint or two them you are probably not the target audience for this legislation, so why would it bother you?

El_Duderino 09

km991148 wrote: »

You say "someone else's fault" as if it's the innocent ol' gambling company that is just trying to play their trade in peace while conveniently ignoring the fact that they spend millions on R&D to make sure they get people hooked. Crazy amounts of money is spent on building the most addictive games possible. Money is spent understanding how the brain works and how it can be exploited.

Siphoning off a percentage for education.. it's not going to cut it really. That's why a little bit of regulation is being suggested to tip the scales back into balance.

It doesn't mean that gambling is next to be banned or any such nonsense (which of course won't work anyway as prohibition rarely does).

Besides if you are putting a few quid on with a pint or two them you are probably not the target audience for this legislation, so why would it bother you?

I completely agree and it's a nice summary of how it's not a normal business because of the R&D on making it addictive as it can be.

The move to online betting means they have moved to micro-dosing their product. So now people can gamble in small amounts which seems less destructive. Gambling is legal and I wouldn't support a change to that. But I'm fine with the ban on advertising.

km991148

El_Duderino 09 wrote: »

I completely agree and it's a nice summary of how it's not a normal business because of the R&D on making it addictive as it can be.

The move to online betting means they have moved to micro-dosing their product. So now people can gamble in small amounts which seems less destructive. Gambling is legal and I wouldn't support a change to that. But I'm fine with the ban on advertising.

And this isn't just 'marketing' budgets. It's full on user experience research teams that have skills in psychology and other areas to really work out how to keep people hooked. It's massive and is really another example of how technology has outran society to a certain degree.

KaneToad

Donald Trump wrote: »

Gambling is a curse for too many people. I would never gamble.

Advertising and promoting it should be banned as soon as possible

But I bet you 100 quid it won't be

You're on!