gambling advertising case study

• Open access
• Published: 14 April 2021

Emergent gambling advertising; a rapid review of marketing content, delivery and structural features

• Jamie Torrance 1 ,
• Bev John 1 ,
• James Greville 1 ,
• Marie O’Hanrahan 1 ,
• Nyle Davies 1 &
• Gareth Roderique-Davies 1  

BMC Public Health volume  21 , Article number:  718 ( 2021 ) Cite this article

17k Accesses

31 Citations

118 Altmetric

Metrics details

Gambling advertising is well-funded and has become increasingly sophisticated in recent years. As the presence and pervasiveness of gambling advertising increases, there is a corresponding need for empirical understanding of the characteristics and trends associated with emergent gambling advertisements and marketing. However, there is limited data on this rapidly evolving phenomenon.

A rapid review was undertaken of the empirical research (2015–2020) that focused upon the content, delivery and structural features incorporated within emerging gambling advertising.

Twenty-five studies were included in the review. The majority of these studies were conducted in either the UK or Australia; two jurisdictions that have unique and particularly liberal gambling environments. The literature suggests that emergent gambling advertising content is targeted, positively framed and in some instances, may overrepresent riskier bets. The sporting and social media spheres are densely populated with such advertisements that involve both direct and indirect marketing strategies. In relation to the online environment, there is evidence to suggest the emergence of more interactive advertisements that prompt user engagement. In addition, financial incentivisation has diversified and is often subject to strict and esoteric conditions. Despite these emergent trends, little provision is devoted to adequately displaying harm reductive or responsible gambling content within gambling advertising.

Conclusions

Overall, there is a paucity of research and lack of methodological diversity concerning the characteristics of advertising within the literature. The barriers to investigating emerging gambling advertising are discussed alongside future research priorities. It is important for this research area to expand in order to appropriately inform ethical industry marketing and effective harm-reduction strategies. [Pre-registered online via Prospero: CRD42020184349].

Peer Review reports

The complexity and availability of gambling continues to grow on an international scale [ 1 , 2 ]. In recent years, there has also been a corresponding increase in the prevalence, diversity and intensity of gambling advertising [ 3 , 4 ]. This expansion is facilitated by significant industry expenditure; especially within jurisdictions that have previously liberalised gambling such as the United Kingdom (UK) and Australia. Estimates indicate that Australian gambling industry spending on marketing and promotion has increased by 33% per year since 2011 to $273 million in 2018 [ 5 ]. UK industry spending grew over 17% per year from 2014 to 2018, reaching an estimated total of £1.5 billion [ 6 ]. This advertising expenditure represents 10.34% of the £14.5 billion gross yield of the UK gambling industry in 2018 [ 7 ]. Such funding has led to the development of sophisticated advertising campaigns that are disseminated across traditional media such as television [ 8 ] and via sports sponsorship [ 4 ]. In addition, these campaigns have resourcefully adapted to the digital sphere via online and social media marketing [ 9 , 10 ]. This shift towards the online environment has granted gambling operators uninterrupted advertising space; especially during the Covid-19 pandemic. Therefore, attempts to curtail TV gambling advertising (as seen within the UK) during periods of lockdown may have little effect on reducing overall exposure amongst young or vulnerable audiences [ 11 ].

Emerging literature has highlighted gambling as a compounding issue of public health [ 12 , 13 ]. The harmful effects of gambling and associated advertising have been suggested to extend beyond populations of disordered gamblers and are apparent across the entire harm-spectrum; including children and young people [ 3 , 14 , 15 ]. Comparable to previously conducted reviews of alcohol and tobacco [ 16 , 17 ], two recently published systematic reviews [ 18 , 19 ] and one narrative review [ 20 ] have indicated that gambling advertising is facilitative of induced gambling intentions or cravings, increased participation and riskier (more impulsive) betting. However, these reviews also identify many of the methodological gaps within the existing gambling advertising research. Within the literature there is an emphasis placed upon the self-reported effects of gambling advertising exposure, especially amongst disordered gamblers. An empirical concentration upon disordered gamblers may pathologize the issue of gambling-harm induced by advertising. This may draw attention away from advertising-induced harm experienced by low-moderate risk gamblers [ 18 ]. Furthermore, the self-reported effects of gambling advertising are often hindered by recall and self-report bias. This may be due (in-part) to the Third Person Effect [ 21 , 22 ] in which individuals are more likely to perceive the impacts of marketing amongst others rather than themselves. In contrast, there is a paucity of research that focuses upon the specific characteristics and mechanisms that underpin emergent gambling advertisements.

There is a growing academic consensus that gambling advertising may incorporate content that is deemed misleading, utilises demographic targeting and uses embedded promotion [ 22 , 23 , 24 ]. However, to date, no review has aimed to provide a taxonomy of gambling advertising characteristics. As observed in the movement towards increased control of tobacco advertising [ 25 , 26 , 27 ], studies that aim to investigate the specific marketing methods utilised by the industry offer an insightful contribution in the shift towards regulatory reform and industry marketing that is more ethical and transparent. Therefore, the current review of gambling advertising characteristics seeks to complement the existing reviews of advertising effect as well as the future literature. This contribution is also warranted in order to appropriately inform the decisions of policymakers and researchers regarding effective harm-reduction strategies.

Due to the fluctuating methods of gambling advertising that largely remain free from effective regulation [ 28 ], this review aimed to examine the empirical evidence concerning the nature and characteristics of emerging (2015–2020) gambling advertisements. Specifically, this review aimed to investigate:

The content and narratives incorporated within gambling advertising.

The methods of gambling advertising delivery and placement.

The mechanics and structural features of gambling advertising e.g. design, usability and complexity.

Methodology

Due to the fluidity and constant development of the gambling advertising sphere, a rapid review methodology was utilised throughout the literature search. Although there is no single accepted approach, the rapid-review process typically involves the same components as a systematic literature review with limitations imposed on the length (e.g. time spent) and depth (e.g. extent of searching) of the methodology [ 29 ]. Despite the variation in approaches, rapid reviews have been reported to produce equivalent findings to systematic reviews if screening, bias/quality appraisal and data synthesis are addressed with appropriate methodological rigor [ 30 , 31 ]. The protocol for the current review was registered via Prospero ( ID: CRD42020184349 ).

Search strategy

Following PRISMA guidelines [ 32 ], a literature search for peer-reviewed articles published since 2015 (completed June 2020) exploring the content, delivery and characteristics of emergent gambling advertising was conducted (Fig.  1 ). Within the search strategy, operational definitions were created for the terms “advertising”, “marketing” and “promotion”. Advertising was defined as any industry financed communication that utilises varying media sources (such as TV or internet ad space) to encourage engagement with a gambling brand or product. Marketing and promotion were operationalised interchangeably and were defined by broader strategies that aim to encourage gambling brand awareness or indirectly influence user engagement (such as sporting sponsorship or affiliate marketing). Therefore, non-industry funded sharing of gambling-related material (such as the independent social media posts of bettors) were not included in the current search strategy. Two academic literature databases were utilised during the search strategy including PsycInfo (via Proquest) and Web of Science (Science Citation Index Expanded & Social Sciences Citation Index). A further set of records were also accrued using Google Scholar. Boolean operators (AND/OR) were used interchangeably during the search strategy in conjunction with the following terms: gambl*, bet*, casino, sport*, market*, advert*, promot*, content* and strateg*. The details of this search strategy can be found in the Search Strategy Report (see Additional file  1 ). An inclusive approach was undertaken given the general paucity of literature in this field alongside the heterogeneity of the methodologies across emergent studies. Due this heterogeneity, a meta-analysis was not conducted.

Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) flow diagram [ 32 ]

Inclusion/exclusion criteria

Empirical studies (quantitative, qualitative and mixed methods) in the English language were included within the rapid review if they addressed the components, designs, incorporated mechanisms and/or delivery of gambling advertising or marketing. The search was conducted in English as the translation of non-English language articles was unfeasible due to time and economic constraints. Eligible studies were also required to have been published between 01/01/2015 and 02/06/2020. This timeframe was implemented due to the current review focusing upon the characteristics of emergent or recent gambling advertising given how rapidly advertising trends shift and fluctuate. Due to the typical limitations that are placed on the length (time spent) of the rapid review methodology, a practical limit of 5 years was therefore placed on the inclusion criteria. All samples of advertising were eligible for inclusion in order to provide a broad range of synthesised narrative findings. Records were excluded if they were published prior to 2015, were discussion or commentary articles, were not published in the English language, or focused primarily on the self-reported effects of and/or perceptions towards gambling advertising.

Screening and quality assessment

Following the retrieval of records via database searching ( n  = 1353) and Google Scholar ( n  = 16), duplicates were removed, and an initial title screening process was undertaken ( n  = 434) in order to exclude records that were irrelevant or not applicable. The remaining record title and abstracts ( n  = 109) were screened by three reviewers (JT, MOH and ND). To ensure fidelity during this process, the reviewers regularly met to discuss their individual decisions and reasoning behind including or excluding records until consensus was reached. Following this, full-text screening of 35 records took place against the inclusion/exclusion criteria, with consultations carried out among the wider research team. Any disagreements were also addressed by this team until a general consensus had been attained. The research team included (but was not limited to) three senior researchers with experience in both the subject matter and the review process. Full-text screening led to the exclusion of ten records due to them being off-topic ( n  = 7) or conference abstracts ( n  = 3). A final set of empirical records ( n  = 25) underwent quality assessment via the Mixed Methods Appraisal Tool (MMAT) 2018 [ 33 ]. The research team determined that all of the final empirical records were conducted to a good methodological standard according to the MMAT and were subsequently included for full data extraction.

Analysis/synthesis

In order to distinguish appropriate and salient themes within the included articles, narrative synthesis was conducted. This process involved repeated readings of the literature, extracting relevant content, and summarizing this content in tabular format (see Additional file  2 ). This information was then synthesised and organised in order to produce a thematic framework. This framework was used to structure the findings according to themes in line with the research aims of the current review. Narrative synthesis was conducted by JT with regular consultation among the co-authors to ensure the applicability and pertinence of the final themes.

Twenty-five studies were included in the review: 6 qualitative studies; 15 that employed a mixed-methods approach and 4 quantitative studies (see Additional file 2 ). The studies were conducted across four jurisdictions that included the United Kingdom ( n  = 12), Australia ( n  = 9), Sweden ( n  = 1) and cross-culturally between the United Kingdom and Spain simultaneously ( n  = 3). The included studies were categorised across three overarching themes (Table  1 ) in line with the research aims of the current review: 1) Content and narratives 2) Delivery and placement; 3) Structural features and mechanics.

Content and narratives

The content and narratives that are incorporated into gambling advertising were outlined in 23 studies. Four sub-themes emerged that included: 1) Targeted content that positively frames gambling; 2) Odds-related content and promoting complex bets; 3) Financially Incentivising content; 4) ‘Responsible gambling’ and harm-reductive content.

Targeted content that positively frames gambling

A number of content analyses highlighted the themes and latent messages that were utilised across a range of gambling advertisements that portray gambling as a desirable, trustworthy and fun activity. In relation to casino gambling, a study of UK online casino marketing identified the use of language within advertisements that predominantly orientated positive emotions such as trust and joy [ 34 ]. In-venue casino advertisements were also positively framed. For example, Australian social club (casino) endorsements were found to portray the venues as being accommodating, comfortable and well-equipped [ 35 ]. These advertisements often aimed to emphasise better value for money and attempted to accentuate an increased chance of success in relation to the gambling activities they offered. Potential customers were encouraged to bring their family (including children) to such establishments due to the availability of non-gambling related amenities provided inside [ 35 ]. This positive framing was also observed within online social casino (free-to-play gambling) advertisements in which bright colour schemes and themes associated with glamour and financial success were employed [ 36 ]. Such advertisements were deemed likely to appeal to young people due to the incorporation of cartoon animal characters and novel pop-culture references [ 36 ]. Additional studies of wagering advertising supported this finding by citing the use of content that contained animations, memes, humour and celebrity endorsement within advertisements that may have particular appeal to children and young people [ 37 , 38 ].

In relation to gendered content, one Swedish study of TV marketing indicated that female casino gamblers were visually overrepresented within potentially targeted advertising content compared to males [ 8 ]. Female-orientated content was also observed in relation to the marketing of UK-based bingo websites [ 39 ]. Such websites included the use of ‘feminine’ colour schemes alongside light-hearted, fun and reassuring content that aimed to create a sense of belonging for new customers. Bingo was also predominantly portrayed as a benign activity to engage with regularly [ 39 ].

Contrastingly, numerous studies of sports betting advertising highlighted the male-orientated focus of incorporated content [ 40 , 41 , 42 ]. For example, Australian operators positively framed sports betting via themes such as thrill, peer bonding, power/control and sports-fan rituals [ 40 ]. This trend was also observable across other jurisdictions such as the UK and Spain in which televised football betting advertisements were male-dominated and visually combined gambling participation, drinking alcohol and emotionally charged situations such as celebrating a goal and peer bonding [ 41 , 43 ]. A further study conducted by Lopez-Gonzales et al. [ 42 ] re-examined these British and Spanish advertisements in terms of their conceptual metaphors and concluded that operators aimed to align love for a team with betting on that team and portrayed sports betting as a rational market in which the smart succeed. In addition, the positive framing of sports betting within UK advertisements may also be facilitated via the use of a dual-persuasive strategy that aims to reduce perceived risks whilst increasing perceptions of increased control. This persuasive content strategy was highlighted in one study that distinguished the incorporation of positive themes that oriented around ‘free’ money and fun whilst emphasising the advantageous effects of knowledge and sports-related data analysis within a masculine context [ 44 ].

From a broader perspective, the current review revealed a less overt positive framing of gambling by operators who utilised social media to build brand awareness amongst audiences and form positive relationships with customers. Studies conducted in both the UK and Australia highlighted the online posting of less commercial content by operators. This included posting related news and upcoming events as a means of positively normalising gambling within a broader social context [ 45 , 46 ]. In a qualitative interview study of Australian gambling industry employees, participants disclosed sharing stories of customer wins and posting interesting news content with the aim of targeting specific audiences; sometimes this audience included young adults, while on other occasions content was directed towards higher profile social media users for the sake of brand exposure [ 47 ].

Odds-related content and promoting complex bets

Several studies highlighted the dissemination of specific odds or betting-related information and content by operators within the context of sports betting. One Australian study identified that the indirect or non-commercialised approach utilised on social media platforms used to build brand awareness was often interwoven with specific odds-related content with the aim of keeping customers informed [ 47 ]. Other studies focused upon the betting and odds-related content disseminated via televised sports betting advertisements. For example, in an investigation of UK and Spanish advertising depictions of betting behaviour, it was determined via qualitative content analysis that bettors were frequently shown to be partaking in ‘in-play’ betting via the use of smart-phones and laptops [ 43 ]. This emergent form of betting refers to the placement of wagers on an ongoing event that is yet to finish; bets can be modified by the user as the event progresses meaning they are often more complex and have longer odds compared to more conventional forms of sports betting [ 43 ].

The current review revealed a skewed representation towards such complex bets as well as other ‘exotic’, ‘special’ or high stakes wagers within UK televised football betting advertisements. Specifically, such advertisements were more likely to depict and promote these complex bets in comparison to more simple bets during matches throughout the English Premier League [ 4 ] and during the 2018 World Cup [ 48 , 49 ]. The authors argued that this was facilitated via a qualitative trend amongst the advertisements that is theoretically designed to nudge bettors through multiple channels towards more impulsive and high-risk bets with larger potential payoffs [ 4 , 48 , 49 ]. This was also observable amongst conventional gambling advertisements within UK bookmaker shop windows during the 2014 World Cup [ 50 ]. It was found that odds-related content associated with complex bets was advertised almost exclusively via this method [ 50 ]. No included studies focused on comparing the depiction of complex vs simple sporting bets within other jurisdictions such as Australia or Sweden. It appears this topic has most thoroughly been investigated in the UK thus far. However, it is acknowledged that studies published in languages other than English may have also examined this topic but were subsequently excluded from the current review during the literature search.

Financially incentivising content

The current review identified a prominent theme of operators incorporating financial incentives into advertising content that took a wide range of forms. Within the included studies financial incentives were characterised by their intended purpose of encouraging gambling amongst consumers by providing them with inducements, offers and promotional deals such as ‘free bets’, bonuses and matched deposits [ 51 ]. In comparison to traditional media sources such as television, financial incentives are often disseminated digitally via mobile and social media sources that do not typically adhere to established advertising restrictions [ 51 ]. Although financial incentives are distributed within the context of various gambling types [ 8 , 39 ], they are most commonly associated with sports betting [ 45 , 51 , 52 , 53 ].

The extensive variability of gambling-related inducements and offers was highlighted within an Australian study that identified 15 different types of incentivising content [ 51 ]. This included; sign-up offers, refer a friend offers, happy hours, refund (stake back) offers, odds-bonuses and winnings paid back to the consumer despite an unsuccessful bet [ 51 ]. Such content was often disseminated by Australian sports betting operators via social media [ 38 , 46 ], direct emails, and texts [ 53 ]. Similarly, UK gambling operators often included inducement and offer-related content within their Twitter posting [ 45 , 52 ] as well as televised gambling advertisements within a sports betting context [ 44 ]. To a lesser degree, televised Swedish casino advertising [ 8 ] and UK-based bingo websites [ 39 ] were also identified for their use of financially incentivising content aimed at prompting customer engagement.

‘Responsible gambling’ and harm-reductive content

Several studies identified a significant lack of ‘responsible gambling’ (RG) and harm-reduction messaging within the advertisements disseminated by gambling operators across a range of formats. This type of messaging typically takes the form of age restriction information, terms and conditions (T&Cs), signposting towards support services and warnings of the negative consequences of gambling [ 54 ]. The included studies focused upon such content assimilated into or presented alongside the marketing or promotion of gambling brands, products and offers. Investigations of standalone harm-reduction or RG campaigns that fall outside of the commercial advertising efforts of the industry were not included.

In a study of Australian social casino advertisements distributed via social media, it was determined that little provision was given to such messaging in which nearly 90% of all analysed adverts ( n  = 115) contained no content aimed to protect consumers from gambling-related harm [ 36 ]. Similarly, this lack of harm-reductive messaging was also observed amongst other social media advertisements for Australian casino venues, lottery venues, electric gaming machine (EGM) venues and sports betting operators [ 46 ]. Individual inducements and offers on Australian wagering websites were also highlighted for their significant lack of RG messaging alongside lengthy T&Cs that often incorporated complicated legalistic language [ 51 ]. Although 95% of the analysed websites ( n  = 223) displayed some form of RG message on the home page, they were characterised by their lack of prominence and visibility [ 51 ].

UK-based studies of gambling advertising produced comparable findings in which Twitter posts from operators and affiliates (third parties) contained very few RG and harm-reduction messages [ 45 , 52 ]. In relation to UK televised sporting events, one study highlighted that only 1% of visual and verbal promotional gambling advertising references within boxing and 3% in football contained age restriction or harm-reduction messaging [ 55 ]. Correspondingly, a comprehensive analysis of printed, radio, internet and televised gambling advertising in the UK ( n  = 300) found that one in seven adverts did not feature age restriction or harm reduction messages whilst one in ten did not contain T&Cs [ 54 ]. Within adverts that did contain this content, such messages and information were characterised by very poor visibility and were unlikely to be displayed within the main frame of the advert. The majority of harm-reduction messages within the analysed advertisements failed to explicitly mention gambling-related harm [ 54 ].

Delivery and placement

The emergent delivery and placement of gambling advertising was outlined within 15 studies. Two sub-themes emerged that included: 1) The expansive placement of gambling advertising in and around sports; 2) Disseminating promotional gambling content via social media platforms.

The expansive placement of gambling advertising in and around sports

The reviewed studies primarily focused upon the more emergent developments between gambling advertising and televised sports over the past 5 years [ 4 , 48 , 49 , 50 , 55 ]. Only one study retrospectively assessed the prevalence of gambling within sports over the previous two decades. This was conducted via an investigation that tracked the frequency of gambling-related shirt sponsorship within English and Scottish Premier League football matches between 1992 and 2018 [ 56 ]. The authors concluded that over the measured period, the gambling industry had significantly increased the frequency of gambling-related shirt sponsorship; especially within the English Premier League. The beginning of this rapid increase coincided with the introduction of the Gambling Act of 2005 in which UK gambling rules and regulations were liberalised [ 56 ].

The prominence of gambling advertising broadcasted around UK televised football was also highlighted in other studies that investigated the presence of commercial-break gambling advertisements that aired during 2016 Premier League matches and the 2018 World Cup [ 4 , 48 , 49 ]. During the 2018 World Cup, 69 televised ‘live odds’ advertisements were shown across 32 matches by five bookmakers on British television [ 49 ]. In comparison, 63 instances of ‘live odds’ betting were depicted within televised gambling advertisements across 2 months (28 matches) of 2016 Premier League football matches [ 4 ]. It should be noted that these analyses focused specifically upon ‘live odds’ advertisements and did not include the other forms of televised football betting advertisements that also aired during this period [ 4 , 49 ].

Due to such high levels of commercial-break advertising, UK gambling operators agreed to a voluntary ‘whistle-to-whistle’ ban on such promotions before 21:00 in 2019 [ 55 ]. However, in an investigation of embedded (within play) gambling advertising that falls outside of the ‘whistle-to-whistle’ criteria, significant numbers of visual and verbal promotional gambling references were found in televised football and boxing [ 55 ]. A total of 358 promotional gambling references were recorded over one boxing match with an average of 4.70 references per broadcast minute; 2595 promotional gambling references were recorded over five football matches with an average of 2.75 references per broadcast minute. In boxing, gambling-references were most frequently displayed within the ring, whilst in football they were most frequently displayed around the pitch [ 55 ].

Disseminating promotional gambling content via social media platforms

In congruence with the increasing prevalence and evolution of social media, numerous studies have highlighted the various delivery and placement methods employed via digital platforms to increase the exposure of gambling advertisements amongst online audiences [ 34 , 36 , 38 , 45 , 46 , 47 , 52 ]. Traditional media sources such as television and printed media are still being utilised by the gambling industry to promote products [ 8 , 50 , 54 ]. However, the global reach of social media platforms may provide operators the opportunity to significantly increase brand awareness, attract new customers and provide efficient customer relationship management [ 45 ].

The platforms used by operators and affiliates to post gambling advertising and promotions included Facebook [ 36 , 38 , 46 , 47 ], YouTube [ 38 ] and most notably Twitter [ 34 , 38 , 45 , 46 , 47 , 52 ]. An Australian interview study of gambling industry employees found that these social media platforms were utilised for specific purposes; Facebook was used primarily for providing rapid feedback to customer queries whilst Twitter was predominantly used for broadcasting gambling-related news and information [ 47 ]. Interviewees also stated that it was common practice to pay for targeted advertising space on social media rather than utilising the broader approach of blanket advertising [ 47 ].

It has been previously noted that sports betting operators and affiliates maintain a prominent online social media presence for promotional and marketing purposes [ 46 ]. Three studies in the current review focused specifically upon the marketing activity and delivery methods of gambling operators and affiliates on Twitter [ 34 , 45 , 52 ]. The authors highlighted the potentially high volume of promotional tweets that were posted on a daily basis. In relation to large gambling operators, two studies concluded daily tweeting frequencies ranging between 89 and 202 tweets [ 34 ] and 33–398 tweets [ 52 ]. Tweets were found to be distributed at peak times during the day and more often on specific days of the week; possibly in synchrony with particular sporting events [ 34 ]. Affiliates were shown to tweet more often with an average of 594 tweets per day [ 45 ]. Affiliate marketing involves promotion by third-parties who are financed by gambling operators to direct customers towards particular offers or gambling products. This growing technique is mostly utilised via social media in which seemingly independent ‘influencers’ or ‘tipsters’ provide betting suggestions and recommendations [ 45 ].

Structural features and mechanics

The structural features and mechanics that are incorporated into emergent gambling advertising were outlined in 11 studies. Structural features were characterised by the utilisation of design elements or properties that determine how the advertisements are engaged with by users. Mechanics were characterised by the rules, procedures and specifications associated with game types or particular bets. Two sub-themes emerged that included: 1) Utilising digitally interactive methods for marketing purposes; 2) Specific conditions and requirements of advertised bets.

Utilising digitally interactive features for marketing purposes

Emergent gambling advertisements have begun to utilise digital features that require user engagement in order to interact with the advertisement, respond to it or share it [ 34 , 36 , 38 , 45 , 47 , 48 , 52 , 53 ]. These methods are often facilitated by the functionalities provided by social media. For example, Facebook advertisements for social casino games often utilise the ‘activity’ button within their posts [ 36 ]. This interactive feature allows the user to directly download the social casino app or automatically opens the web-browser interface of the game [ 36 ]. A similar characteristic was also highlighted within the promotional tweets, direct emails and texts from UK and Australian gambling operators in which direct URL links to the associated betting websites were often embedded within the promotional messages sent to consumers [ 34 , 53 ].

Two Australian studies also distinguished gambling advertisements that encouraged user-interaction via social media [ 46 , 47 ]. Audiences were often prompted to use the ‘comment’, ‘like’ and ‘share’ functions in relation to operator posts for the sake of brand-exposure [ 46 , 47 ]. Another strategy of increasing brand-exposure involved the utilisation of specific Twitter hashtags that reference particular sporting events or promote certain bets [ 34 , 38 , 52 ]. By doing so, sports betting operators could embed their promotional tweets into popular or trending threads relating to upcoming sporting events that were otherwise non-gambling related [ 38 ].

Alongside brand-exposure, hashtag functionality was also offered to potential customers by UK gambling operators as a means of increasing user-engagement [ 48 ]. Users could take advantage of hashtags such as ‘#getaprice’ and ‘#yourodds’ that allow them to create their own bets by requesting odds for combined events (complex bets) of their choice. The gambling operator then replies back to the user with the odds for their requested bet [ 48 ]. This interchange was also commonly performed on a more personal level in which Twitter users could send public or direct messages to operators regarding their customer queries about specific bets, odds and other gambling-related information [ 34 , 45 , 52 ]. Less overt interactions were also observable via Twitter in which UK operators aimed to increase customer engagement by utilising the ability to embed online-polls into their tweets [ 45 , 52 ]. These polls often posed seemingly innocuous sports-related questions to users in which the promotional intent of the post is not made explicit [ 45 , 52 ]. Examples of such polls include ‘ Will Harry Maguire score against Manchester United?’ (posted by Bet365 in 2018: [ 52 ] and ‘ What’s been the best goal of the World Cup so far ?’ (posted by SkyBet in 2018: [ 45 ]. Although the use of digitally interactive features of marketing was evident across numerous gambling formats [ 36 , 47 ], the evidence suggests they were overwhelmingly utilised within a sports betting context. This is likely due to the incorporation of live (sports-related) information and high level of customisation observable within sports betting. Currently, such elements appear to drive operator use of interactive features and therefore prompt interactive engagement amongst audiences more than other forms of gambling.

Conditions and requirements of advertised bets and offers

The mechanics involved with advertised bets and offers were highlighted in two studies that focused upon sports betting in both the UK [ 49 ] and Australia [ 51 ]. It was determined that many advertised sports betting incentives and inducements had specific conditions, stipulations and play-through requirements that restrict when tangible winnings can be withdrawn from a betting account. These conditions were highlighted for their abstruse and complex nature [ 51 ]. For example, a particular sign-up incentive highlighted by Hing et al. [ 51 ] offered bettors a 100% matched bonus up to $200 on the condition that they deposited $20 upon opening a new betting account. The conditions also stipulated that bettors needed to stake the deposit amount combined with the amount equivalent to the bonus bet at odds of 1.5 or greater. Bettors were required to do this three times over 3 months. As indicated by Hing et al. [ 51 ], “ These play-through requirements meant that it would cost bettors $1000 of their own money for a chance to win from a $200 bonus bet ” (p. 11). Similarly, ‘live-odds’ advertisements disseminated by UK bookmakers have also been shown to possess specific conditions [ 49 ]. During the 2018 football World Cup many ‘live-odds’ bets were advertised that were limited in terms of both time and quantity. Furthermore, bets were sometimes shown to be ‘improving’ in odds. The authors suggested that these mechanics may have been strategically designed to make ‘live-odds’ bets appear more urgent than necessary [ 49 ].

This rapid review aimed to contribute to the international literature by improving understanding of emergent gambling advertising content, delivery methods and structural features. The evidence suggests that overall, gambling advertising has increased in both complexity and interactivity. In relation to content, previous reviews have highlighted advertising that positively frames or glamorises gambling in a broad sense [ 57 , 58 ]. However, the current review suggests that this positively framed content has evolved and diversified beyond general glamorisation. This development is especially prominent within male-orientated sports betting advertisements that align gambling with emotionally charged situations, team loyalty and peer bonding [ 40 , 42 ]. The evidence suggests there may also be an additional form of positive framing within this content that represents themes of increased control whilst underrepresenting themes of risk via a dual persuasive strategy [ 44 ]. Positively framed advertising content may also be orientated towards young adults [ 36 ], parents [ 35 ] and women [ 39 ]; although further research is warranted with regards to these groups.

The pattern of results also points towards the depiction and promotion of complex, in-play and exotic bets compared to simple bets within the content of UK football betting advertisements. There may be an economic underpinning to this marketing technique as complex bets are subject to longer odds, equating to potentially higher profit margins for the gambling industry [ 49 ]. In addition, such bets may facilitate the emergent transformation of sports betting into an accelerated, continuous and more impulse-driven form of gambling [ 49 , 59 ]. The current review also suggests that the dissemination of incentivising gambling content such as inducements and offers continue to remain prominent methods of encouraging potential customer engagement. These incentives now take many forms [ 51 ], are increasingly complicated, and are pervasively advertised [ 44 , 52 ]. Contrastingly, much less provision is given to content that contains RG or harm-reductive messaging within gambling advertisements. The included studies indicated that such content is inconsistent, characterised by low visibility and sometimes completely absent [ 46 , 54 ]. In their current form, such messages have been highlighted for their likely inadequacy in reducing gambling-related harm. For example, a recent eye-tracking study of bettors and non-bettors demonstrated that very few visual fixations are placed on these messages in comparison to other wagering information displayed within sports betting advertisements [ 60 ]. Moreover, when specific RG messages are in fact actively perceived by bettors, the messages may fail in terms of their supposed purpose. An example of such message includes the popular UK RG slogan ‘when the fun stops, stop!”. This specific message was identified in approximately two-fifths of the advertising sample utilised by Critchlow et al. [ 54 ]. A recent study of 3000 gamblers, indicated that this particular message either showed no beneficial effect of curtailing gambling behaviour or produced a backfire effect that influenced increased betting participation [ 61 ].

Within UK sports in particular, the placement and delivery of gambling advertising has intensified over the previous 15 years. Sports betting promotions now extend beyond conventional methods of commercial break advertising and into the area of play [ 56 ]. Consequently, shirt sponsorship [ 56 ], verbal references made by commentators and embedded (ring/pitch side) advertisements [ 55 ] are now saturated with gambling-related stimuli. This is likely due to the unique and liberal nature of the 2005 UK Gambling Act. Although this legislation is set for review [ 62 ], it is unlikely that gambling-related sponsorship will be completely prohibited within UK sports. However, there is a political and academic consensus that the UK should follow nations like Spain in which gambling sponsorship within football has been prohibited by law [ 63 ]. Future research should seek to investigate the emergent placement of gambling advertising within sports across jurisdictions other than the UK that are set to liberalise sports betting such as North America. In the context of the UK, further research is warranted to investigate the online areas into which gambling advertising may be diverted in response to increasingly restrictive and more effective legislation [ 55 , 64 ]. This transition has already commenced to a certain extent, as evidenced by the increasing presence of gambling advertising across social media platforms [ 46 , 52 ]. The regulation of advertising across social media is likely to prove difficult given the direct and indirect promotion of gambling within these online spaces. For example, the findings of the current review indicate an emerging trend in which operators utilise seemingly innocuous content to build brand awareness [ 46 ] and finance affiliate promotion to implicitly market gambling online [ 45 ]. The promotional intent of these methods is not often made explicit. Furthermore, affiliate marketing has been recently questioned in terms of its transparency, sincerity and true benefit to consumers [ 10 ]. Due to this increased use of third-parties, affiliate marketing may also operate as a buffer that shifts or obscures the social responsibility of the gambling industry [ 45 ].

From a structural perspective, conventional means of disseminating gambling advertising such as television, radio and billboards have necessarily adopted a linear approach in which advertising is a one-way process of stimuli exposure with minimal user-interaction. By comparison, the recent evidence indicates that emergent gambling advertisements have begun to utilise digitally interactive features that provide the opportunity for a more collaborative interchange between the operator and the public [ 34 , 45 , 53 ]. Therefore, the current review recommends the empirical study of the mechanisms and impacts associated with these emergent structural features as a future research priority. This includes promotional URL links sent directly to bettors, gambling-related ‘polls’ posted by operator social media accounts and gambling-related hashtags utilised by consumers.

In relation to the completeness and applicability of these findings, it appears the available evidence is sufficient but not comprehensive in addressing the present research aims. As seen within the sphere of tobacco and alcohol marketing, internal information concerning gambling industry marketing is not made readily available to the public and is therefore difficult to obtain [ 65 , 66 , 67 ]. There is also a corresponding paucity of qualitative interview studies that explore marketing techniques involving gambling industry employees [ 47 ]. This lack of internal information results in empirical studies primarily taking an interpretative approach with researchers investigating the nature of gambling advertising via content or sentiment analysis. Although these forms of analysis are legitimate methods of elucidating subjective themes and messages within media content, appropriate measures must be taken to ensure trustworthiness [ 68 ]. However, amongst such studies in the current review ( n  = 20), only 11 reported the use of numerous coders. Such methodological limitations reduce the reliability of the associated studies and impede the quality of the research area.

The included studies typically included large samples of televised gambling adverts that were representative of those aired to the public. Although the content of televised adverts may be targeted, they are not disseminated based on the personalised data of the audience, thus individuals who watch the same television broadcast will be presented with the same advertisement. In contrast, representative online advertisements may be more challenging to obtain and investigate due to the industry trend of moving away from the use of online blanket marketing and towards the utilisation of individually targeted advertisements that utilise the digitised personal data of the user [ 47 ]. Theoretically, individuals could visit the same web page but be presented with different gambling advertisements. Furthermore, although mentioned anecdotally throughout the associated literature, there is a noticeable lack of research that investigates unsolicited pop-up advertising disseminated online and within mobile apps. These advertisements may be difficult to empirically study due (in-part) to their unpredictable and context-specific nature. This review therefore proposes investigation into online gambling advertisements that use personalised data as an additional future research priority in congruence with this popular marketing strategy.

It also appears the gambling advertising sphere may evolve at a speed that the academic literature struggles to keep pace with. The current review indicates that the literature base surrounding the nature and characteristics of gambling advertising has slowly expanded between 2015 and 2020 but remains underdeveloped in terms of scope and methodological diversity. In contrast, much more research has been conducted in relation to the similar areas of tobacco, alcohol and fast-food marketing [ 69 , 70 , 71 ]. The majority of available evidence has been conducted in either the UK or Australia. Therefore, alongside the general paucity of existing research, even less information has been produced in relation to other jurisdictions in which gambling and associated advertising have also been liberalised. Without insight into the unique gambling advertising characteristics of jurisdictions other than the UK and Australia, the associated literature remains culturally homogenous. In addition, there is a corresponding paucity of cross-cultural studies that compare the characteristics of gambling marketing based on varying regulatory approaches between jurisdictions. The current review therefore recommends the growth of such studies within the future literature in congruence with the global expansion of the gambling sphere.

Limitations

The findings of the current review should be considered in light of some potential limitations. Firstly, only studies that were published in the English language were included. Gambling advertising is prevalent across numerous jurisdictions in which English is not the primary language such as Sweden, Spain and France. Therefore, insightful and pertinent studies may have been excluded during the search strategy. Secondly, due to the rapid review methodology utilised, limitations were placed upon the number of databases searched alongside the time dedicated to screening. For example, although the MMAT is a widely used and reputable quality assessment tool [ 33 ], it is acknowledged that more in-depth yet time consuming tools are available. Despite these potential limitations, numerous coders were involved in the screening and quality assessment process in order to reinforce the rigor of the current methodology. Furthermore, the protocol for the current review was registered online alongside the inclusion of a search strategy report (Additional File 1 ) to increase transparency and trustworthiness.

There is limited research that focuses upon the content, delivery and structural features of emerging gambling advertising. The associated literature base between 2015 and 2020 has slowly expanded but is lacking in volume and diversity. This may be problematic given the findings here suggesting that as digital communication and the liberalisation of gambling advance, so do the intensity and complexity of gambling advertising. Furthermore, the online evolution of gambling advertising has resulted in more interactive adverts in which the promotional intent is less conspicuous than more conventional marketing strategies. There are numerous barriers that hinder empirical investigation into these topics. A deeper understanding and further research into gambling advertising characteristics are therefore warranted in order to effectively minimise potential harm, appropriately regulate gambling advertising and encourage more ethical marketing.

Availability of data and materials

Data sharing is not applicable for this review as the procedure did not involve the construction or analysis of a dataset. Supplementary materials relating to the search strategy and a summary of included studies are provided (Additional files  1 & 2 ).

Abbreviations

Electric gaming machine

Mixed-methods appraisal tool

Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses

Responsible gambling

Terms and conditions

United Kingdom

Lawn S, Oster C, Riley B, Smith D, Baigent M, Rahamathulla M. A literature review and gap analysis of emerging technologies and new trends in gambling. Int J Environ Res Public Health. 2020;17(3):744. https://doi.org/10.3390/ijerph17030744 .

Article   PubMed Central   Google Scholar  

Winters KC, Smith ND. Gambling expansion and its association with disordered gambling trends. In: Responsible Gambling: Primary Stakeholder Perspectives; 2019. p. 85. https://doi.org/10.1093/med-psych/9780190074562.003.0004 .

Chapter   Google Scholar  

Browne M, Hing N, Russell AM, Thomas A, Jenkinson R. The impact of exposure to wagering advertisements and inducements on intended and actual betting expenditure: an ecological momentary assessment study. J Behav Addict. 2019;8(1):146–56. https://doi.org/10.1556/2006.8.2019.10 .

Article   PubMed   PubMed Central   Google Scholar  

Newall PW. Behavioral complexity of British gambling advertising. Addict Res Theory. 2017;25(6):505–11. https://doi.org/10.1080/16066359.2017.1287901 .

Article   Google Scholar  

Victorian Responsible Gambling Foundation. Gambling advertising 2019. Available from:  https://responsiblegambling.vic.gov.au/resources/gambling-victoria/gambling-advertising/ . Accessed 6 July 2020.

GambleAware. Press Release. 2018. Available from:  https://www.begambleaware.org/media/1857/2018-11-24-gambling-marketing-online-five-times-tv-ad-spend.pdf . Accessed 6 July 2020.

Gambling Commission. Industry statistics - April 2016 to march 2018 - updated to include October 2017 to September 2018. 2018. Available from:  https://cliftondavies.com/wp-content/uploads/2019/05/GC-Gambling-industry-statistics-report-May-2019.pdf . Accessed 15 Mar 2021.

Håkansson A, Widinghoff C. Television gambling advertisements: extent and content of gambling advertisements with a focus on potential high-risk commercial messages. Addict Behav Rep. 2019;9:100182. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.abrep.2019.100182 .

Thomas SL, Bestman A, Pitt H, Cassidy R, McCarthy S, Nyemcsok C, et al. Young people’s awareness of the timing and placement of gambling advertising on traditional and social media platforms: a study of 11–16-year-olds in Australia. Harm Reduct J. 2018;15(1):1–13.

Houghton S, Moss M, Casey E. Affiliate marketing of sports betting–a cause for concern? Int Gambl Stud. 2020;20(2):240–5. https://doi.org/10.1080/14459795.2020.1718737 .

Rossi R, Nairn A, Smith J, Inskip C. Express:“get a£ 10 free bet every week!”–gambling advertising on twitter: volume, content, followers, engagement and regulatory compliance. J Public Policy Mark. 2021. p. 0743915621999674.  https://journals.sagepub.com/home/asp .

John B, Holloway K, Davies N, May T, Buhociu M, Cousins AL, et al. Gambling harm as a global public health concern: a mixed method investigation of trends in Wales. Front Public Health. 2020;8:320. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpubh.2020.00320 .

David JL, Thomas SL, Randle M, Daube M. A public health advocacy approach for preventing and reducing gambling related harm. Aust N Z J Public Health. 2020;44(1):14–9. https://doi.org/10.1111/1753-6405.12949 .

Article   PubMed   Google Scholar  

Clark H, Coll-Seck AM, Banerjee A, Peterson S, Dalglish SL, Ameratunga S, et al. A future for the world's children? A WHO–UNICEF–Lancet Commission. Lancet. 2020;395(10224):605–58.

Muggleton N, Parpart P, Newall P, Leake D, Gathergood J, Stewart N. The association between gambling and financial, social and health outcomes in big financial data. Nat Hum Behav. 2021;5(3):319–26. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41562-020-01045-w .

Paynter J, Edwards R. The impact of tobacco promotion at the point of sale: a systematic review. Nicotine Tob Res. 2009;11(1):25–35. https://doi.org/10.1093/ntr/ntn002 .

Anderson P, De Bruijn A, Angus K, Gordon R, Hastings G. Impact of alcohol advertising and media exposure on adolescent alcohol use: a systematic review of longitudinal studies. Alcohol Alcohol. 2009;44(3):229–43. https://doi.org/10.1093/alcalc/agn115 .

Bouguettaya A, Lynott D, Carter A, Zerhouni O, Meyer S, Ladegaard I, et al. The relationship between gambling advertising and gambling attitudes, intentions and behaviours: a critical and meta-analytic review. Curr Opin Behav Sci. 2020;31:89–101. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cobeha.2020.02.010 .

Newall PW, Moodie C, Reith G, Stead M, Critchlow N, Morgan A, et al. Gambling marketing from 2014 to 2018: a literature review. Curr Addict Rep. 2019;6(2):49–56. https://doi.org/10.1007/s40429-019-00239-1 .

Sulkunen PBT, Örnberg JC, Egerer M, Hellman M, Livingstone C, Marionneau V, et al. Industry strategies and their regulation: marketing, game features, and venue characteristics. In: Setting Limits. Oxford: Oxford University Press; 2019. p. 107–24.

Davison WP. The third-person effect in communication. Public Opin Q. 1983;47(1):1–15. https://doi.org/10.1086/268763 .

Torrance J, Roderique-Davies G, Thomas SL, Davies N, John B. ‘It’s basically everywhere’: young adults’ perceptions of gambling advertising in the UK. Health Promot Int. 2020. https://doi.org/10.1093/heapro/daaa126 .

McGee D. On the normalisation of online sports gambling among young adult men in the UK: a public health perspective. Public Health. 2020;184:89–94. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.puhe.2020.04.018 .

Article   CAS   PubMed   Google Scholar  

Roderique-Davies G, Torrance J, Bhairon T, Cousins A, John B. Embedded gambling promotion in football: an explorative study of cue-exposure and urge to gamble. J Gambl Stud. 2020;36(3):1013–25. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10899-020-09949-y .

World Health Organization. WHO report on the global tobacco epidemic, 2013 [Internet]. WHO; 2013. Available from:  https://apps.who.int/iris/bitstream/handle/10665/85381/WHO_NMH_PND_13.2_eng.pdf . Accessed 6 June 2020.

Hastings G, MacFadyen L. A day in the life of an advertising man: review of internal documents from the UK tobacco industry's principal advertising agencies. Bmj. 2000;321(7257):366–71. https://doi.org/10.1136/bmj.321.7257.366 .

Article   CAS   PubMed   PubMed Central   Google Scholar  

Pollay RW. Targeting tactics in selling smoke: youthful aspects of 20th century cigarette advertising. J Mark Theory Pract. 1995;3(1):1–22. https://doi.org/10.1080/10696679.1995.11501675 .

Hörnle J, Schmidt-Kessen M, Littler A, Padumadasa E. Regulating online advertising for gambling–once the genie is out of the bottle …. Inf Commun Technol Law. 2019;28(3):311–34.

Khangura S, Konnyu K, Cushman R, Grimshaw J, Moher D. Evidence summaries: the evolution of a rapid review approach. Syst Rev. 2012;1(1):1–9.

Haby MM, Chapman E, Clark R, Barreto J, Reveiz L, Lavis JN. What are the best methodologies for rapid reviews of the research evidence for evidence-informed decision making in health policy and practice: a rapid review. Health Res Policy Syst. 2016;14(1):1–12.

Tricco AC, Antony J, Zarin W, Strifler L, Ghassemi M, Ivory J, et al. A scoping review of rapid review methods. BMC Med. 2015;13(1):1–15.

Moher D, Shamseer L, Clarke M, Ghersi D, Liberati A, Petticrew M, et al. Preferred reporting items for systematic review and meta-analysis protocols (PRISMA-P) 2015 statement. Syst Rev. 2015;4(1):1–9. https://doi.org/10.1186/2046-4053-4-1 .

Hong QN, Fàbregues S, Bartlett G, Boardman F, Cargo M, Dagenais P, et al. The mixed methods appraisal tool (MMAT) version 2018 for information professionals and researchers. Educ Inf. 2018;34(4):285–91. https://doi.org/10.3233/EFI-180221 .

Bradley A, James RJ. How are major gambling brands using twitter? Int Gambl Stud. 2019;19(3):451–70. https://doi.org/10.1080/14459795.2019.1606927 .

Bestman A, Thomas S, Randle M, Pitt H, Daube M, Pettigrew S. Shaping pathways to gambling consumption? An analysis of the promotion of gambling and non-gambling activities from gambling venues. Addict Res Theory. 2016;24(2):152–62. https://doi.org/10.3109/16066359.2015.1093121 .

Abarbanel B, Gainsbury SM, King D, Hing N, Delfabbro PH. Gambling games on social platforms: how do advertisements for social casino games target young adults? Policy Internet. 2017;9(2):184–209. https://doi.org/10.1002/poi3.135 .

Pitt H, Thomas SL, Bestman A, Randle M, Daube M. Do betting advertisements contain attention strategies that may appeal to children? An interpretative content analysis. Health Promot J Austr. 2018;29(3):265–73. https://doi.org/10.1002/hpja.12 .

Thomas SL, Bestman A, Pitt H, Deans E, Randle MJ, Stoneham M, et al. The marketing of wagering on social media: an analysis of promotional content on YouTube, Twitter and Facebook. 2015.

Google Scholar  

Stead M, Dobbie F, Angus K, Purves RI, Reith G, Macdonald L. The online bingo boom in the UK: a qualitative examination of its appeal. PLoS One. 2016;11(5):e0154763. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0154763 .

Deans EG, Thomas SL, Daube M, Derevensky J, Gordon R. Creating symbolic cultures of consumption: an analysis of the content of sports wagering advertisements in Australia. BMC Public Health. 2016;16(1):1–11.

Lopez-Gonzalez H, Estévez A, Jiménez-Murcia S, Griffiths MD. Alcohol drinking and low nutritional value food eating behavior of sports bettors in gambling advertisements. Int J Ment Heal Addict. 2018;16(1):81–9. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11469-017-9789-0 .

Lopez-Gonzalez H, Guerrero-Solé F, Estévez A, Griffiths M. Betting is loving and bettors are predators: a conceptual metaphor approach to online sports betting advertising. J Gambl Stud. 2018;34(3):709–26. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10899-017-9727-x .

Lopez-Gonzalez H, Guerrero-Solé F, Griffiths MD. A content analysis of how ‘normal’sports betting behaviour is represented in gambling advertising. Addict Res Theory. 2018;26(3):238–47. https://doi.org/10.1080/16066359.2017.1353082 .

Lopez-Gonzalez H, Estévez A, Griffiths MD. Controlling the illusion of control: a grounded theory of sports betting advertising in the UK. Int Gambl Stud. 2018;18(1):39–55. https://doi.org/10.1080/14459795.2017.1377747 .

Houghton S, McNeil A, Hogg M, Moss M. Comparing the twitter posting of British gambling operators and gambling affiliates: a summative content analysis. Int Gambl Stud. 2019;19(2):312–26. https://doi.org/10.1080/14459795.2018.1561923 .

Gainsbury SM, Delfabbro P, King DL, Hing N. An exploratory study of gambling operators’ use of social media and the latent messages conveyed. J Gambl Stud. 2016;32(1):125–41. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10899-015-9525-2 .

Gainsbury SM, King DL, Hing N, Delfabbro P. Social media marketing and gambling: an interview study of gambling operators in Australia. Int Gambl Stud. 2015;15(3):377–93. https://doi.org/10.1080/14459795.2015.1058409 .

Newall P, Walasek L, Ludvig E. Gambling advertising and problem gambling: a content analysis of TV adverts from the 2018 World Cup; 2019.

Newall PW, Thobhani A, Walasek L, Meyer C. Live-odds gambling advertising and consumer protection. PLoS One. 2019;14(6):e0216876. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0216876 .

Newall PW. How bookies make your money. Judgement Decis Making. 2015;10(3):225–31.

Hing N, Sproston K, Brook K, Brading R. The structural features of sports and race betting inducements: issues for harm minimisation and consumer protection. J Gambl Stud. 2017;33(2):685–704. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10899-016-9642-6 .

Killick EA, Griffiths MD. A content analysis of gambling operators’ twitter accounts at the start of the English premier league football season. J Gambl Stud. 2020;36(1):319–41. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10899-019-09879-4 .

Rawat V, Hing N, Russell AM. What’s the message? A content analysis of emails and texts received from wagering operators during sports and racing events. J Gambl Stud. 2020;36(4):1107–21. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10899-019-09896-3 .

Critchlow N, Moodie C, Stead M, Morgan A, Newall PW, Dobbie F. Visibility of age restriction warnings, harm reduction messages and terms and conditions: a content analysis of paid-for gambling advertising in the United Kingdom. Public Health. 2020;184:79–88. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.puhe.2020.04.004 .

Purves R, Critchlow N, Morgan A, Stead M, Dobbie F. Examining the frequency and nature of gambling marketing in televised broadcasts of professional sporting events in the United Kingdom. Public Health. 2020;184:71–8. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.puhe.2020.02.012 .

Bunn C, Ireland R, Minton J, Holman D, Philpott M, Chambers S. Shirt sponsorship by gambling companies in the English and Scottish premier leagues: global reach and public health concerns. Soccer Soc. 2019;20(6):824–35. https://doi.org/10.1080/14660970.2018.1425682 .

Binde P. Gambling advertising: a critical research review; 2014.

Parke A, Harris A, Parke J, Rigbye J, Blaszczynski A. Responsible marketing and advertising in gambling: a critical review. J Gambl Bus Econ. 2014;8(3):21–35.

Parke A, Parke J. Transformation of sports betting into a rapid and continuous gambling activity: a grounded theoretical investigation of problem sports betting in online settings. Int J Ment Heal Addict. 2019;17(6):1340–59. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11469-018-0049-8 .

Lole L, Li E, Russell AM, Greer N, Thorne H, Hing N. Are sports bettors looking at responsible gambling messages? An eye-tracking study on wagering advertisements. J Behav Addict. 2019;8(3):499–507. https://doi.org/10.1556/2006.8.2019.37 .

Newall P, Weiss-Cohen L, Singmann H, Walasek L, Ludvig E. No credible evidence that UK safer gambling messages reduce gambling; 2021.

Department for Digital C, Media & Sport. Review of the Gambling Act 2005 Terms of Reference and Call for Evidence 2021. Available from:  https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/review-of-the-gambling-act-2005-terms-of-reference-and-call-for-evidence/review-of-the-gambling-act-2005-terms-of-reference-and-call-for-evidence . Accessed 15 Mar 21.

Minsterio de Consumo. Proyecto de Real Decreto de Comunicaciones Comerciales de las actividades de juego. 2020. Available from: https://www.azarplus.com/wp-content/uploads/2020/07/notification_draft_2020_443_E_ES.pdf . Accessed 15 Mar 2021.

APPG. Online gambling harm inquiry: All Party Parliamentary Group; 2020. Available from: http://www.grh-appg.com/wp-content/uploads/2020/12/Online-report-Final-June162020.pdf . Accessed 6 July 2020.

Hastings G, Brooks O, Stead M, Angus K, Anker T, Farrell T. "They'll drink bucket loads of the stuff": An analysis of internal alcohol industry documents; 2010.

Cassidy R, Loussouarn C, Pisac A. Fair game: producing gambling research. London: Goldsmiths, University of London; 2013.

Anderson SJ, Dewhirst T, Ling PM. Every document and picture tells a story: using internal corporate document reviews, semiotics, and content analysis to assess tobacco advertising. Tob Control. 2006;15(3):254–61. https://doi.org/10.1136/tc.2005.013854 .

Elo S, Kääriäinen M, Kanste O, Pölkki T, Utriainen K, Kyngäs H. Qualitative content analysis: a focus on trustworthiness. SAGE Open. 2014;4(1):2158244014522633.

Hastings G, Anderson S, Cooke E, Gordon R. Alcohol marketing and young people's drinking: a review of the research. J Public Health Policy. 2005;26(3):296–311. https://doi.org/10.1057/palgrave.jphp.3200039 .

Story M, French S. Food advertising and marketing directed at children and adolescents in the US. Int J Behav Nutr Phys Act. 2004;1(1):1–17.

Rosenberg NJ, Siegel M. Use of corporate sponsorship as a tobacco marketing tool: a review of tobacco industry sponsorship in the USA, 1995-99. Tob Control. 2001;10(3):239–46. https://doi.org/10.1136/tc.10.3.239 .

Download references

Acknowledgements

Not applicable.

This review was conducted as part of JT’s PhD studies. The PhD is funded by GambleAware. GambleAware had no involvement in the design, procedure, interpretation or write-up of the current review. All other co-authors received no funding for their role in this research.

Author information

Authors and affiliations.

Addictions Research Group, School of Psychology and Therapeutic Studies, University of South Wales, Pontypridd, CF37 1DL, UK

Jamie Torrance, Bev John, James Greville, Marie O’Hanrahan, Nyle Davies & Gareth Roderique-Davies

You can also search for this author in PubMed   Google Scholar

Contributions

J.T., G.R.D. and B.J. were involved in all aspects of this work including design, literature search, screening, analysis and manuscript preparation. MOH., N.D. and J.G. were involved in the screening, analysis and interpretation of this work alongside the critical revision of the manuscript for publication. The author(s) read and approved the final manuscript.

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Jamie Torrance .

Ethics declarations

Ethics approval and consent to participate.

Not applicable .

Consent for publication

Competing interests.

The authors declare that they have no competing interests.

Additional information

Publisher’s note.

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Supplementary Information

Additional file 1..

Search Strategy Report. A table denoting the databases used, the search terms and results within the search strategy of the current review

Additional file 2.

Included Study Summary. Summary of included study characteristics and key findings

Rights and permissions

Open Access This article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License, which permits use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons licence, and indicate if changes were made. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article's Creative Commons licence, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the article's Creative Commons licence and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder. To view a copy of this licence, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ . The Creative Commons Public Domain Dedication waiver ( http://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/ ) applies to the data made available in this article, unless otherwise stated in a credit line to the data.

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article.

Torrance, J., John, B., Greville, J. et al. Emergent gambling advertising; a rapid review of marketing content, delivery and structural features. BMC Public Health 21 , 718 (2021). https://doi.org/10.1186/s12889-021-10805-w

Download citation

Received : 01 March 2021

Accepted : 05 April 2021

Published : 14 April 2021

DOI : https://doi.org/10.1186/s12889-021-10805-w

Share this article

Anyone you share the following link with will be able to read this content:

Sorry, a shareable link is not currently available for this article.

Provided by the Springer Nature SharedIt content-sharing initiative

• Advertising
• Public health

BMC Public Health

ISSN: 1471-2458

• Submission enquiries: [email protected]
• General enquiries: [email protected]

Click through the PLOS taxonomy to find articles in your field.

For more information about PLOS Subject Areas, click here .

Loading metrics

Open Access

Peer-reviewed

Research Article

Frequent gamblers’ perceptions of the role of gambling marketing in their behaviour: An interpretative phenomenological analysis

Roles Conceptualization, Formal analysis, Funding acquisition, Investigation, Methodology, Project administration, Visualization, Writing – original draft, Writing – review & editing

* E-mail: [email protected]

Affiliation Department of Psychology, Northumbria University at Newcastle, Newcastle-upon-Tyne, United Kingdom

Roles Formal analysis, Project administration, Visualization, Writing – review & editing

Roles Conceptualization, Supervision, Writing – review & editing

Affiliation Department of Sociology, University of York, York, United Kingdom

Roles Conceptualization, Methodology, Supervision, Writing – review & editing

Affiliations Department of Psychology, Northumbria University at Newcastle, Newcastle-upon-Tyne, United Kingdom, Psychology and Communication Technology (PaCT) Lab, Northumbria University, Newcastle-upon-Tyne, United Kingdom

• Scott Houghton, 
• Georgia Punton, 
• Emma Casey, 
• Andrew McNeill, 

• Published: June 16, 2023
• https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0287393
• Peer Review
• Reader Comments

This study explored how frequent gamblers perceive gambling marketing and the role they feel it has in their gambling behaviour. Ten frequent gamblers participated in semi-structured interviews oriented around their experiences of gambling marketing. An interpretative phenomenological analysis of the data led to three overarching themes: exploiting gambling marketing for personal gain; gambling marketing as a test of self-control; and safer gambling messages marketing perceived as ineffective. These themes encapsulated participants’ views of gambling marketing as something they could take advantage of to increase their own gambling success. Marketing was also perceived as a test of self-control among self-identified experienced gamblers, although identified as a risk to those who are considered more vulnerable. Finally, safer gambling messages included within marketing was considered ineffective due to perceived insincerity and being seen as an ‘afterthought’ by marketers. In support of previous research, the current investigation highlights concerning narratives around self-control and perceived risk, as encapsulated within gambling marketing, and these are evident in the perceptions of frequent gamblers. Given gamblers’ perceived lack of effectiveness of current safer gambling messages within marketing, future research should explore new avenues for safer gambling promotion.

Citation: Houghton S, Punton G, Casey E, McNeill A, Moss M (2023) Frequent gamblers’ perceptions of the role of gambling marketing in their behaviour: An interpretative phenomenological analysis. PLoS ONE 18(6): e0287393. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0287393

Editor: José C. Perales, Universidad de Granada, SPAIN

Received: November 22, 2022; Accepted: June 5, 2023; Published: June 16, 2023

Copyright: © 2023 Houghton et al. This is an open access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License , which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original author and source are credited.

Data Availability: Data cannot be shared publicly as it is qualitative data on a sensitive topic area that could be personally identifiable based on the depth of discussion present within the interviews. Additionally, when ethical approval was sought for the current research, participants were not told that their transcripts would be made available online. However, a full analytical trail is available at https://osf.io/utzds/ , which documents the analysis process from initial coding to final themes.

Funding: The study was carried out as a part of the lead authors’ (SH) PhD studies. The PhD was funded by GambleAware ( https://www.begambleaware.org/ ). The funder played no role in the design, data collection, data analysis, decision to publish or the preparation of the manuscript.

Competing interests: The study was carried out as a part of the lead authors’ (SH) PhD studies. The PhD was funded by GambleAware. No other author has competing interests to declare.

Introduction

A recent review examining the social and economic cost of gambling-related harms in Great Britain estimated the annual cost to be £1.27 billion, although this is likely underestimated due to a lack of high-quality research quantifying such harms [ 1 ]. Gambling-related harms span across numerous domains, from financial impacts and emotional distress to lesser considered factors such as reduced work performance and cultural harms [ 2 ]. Harms do not only impact the individual gambler, with a recent literature review highlighting the significant negative effects gambling can have on concerned significant others [ 3 ]. Given the wide-ranging impact of gambling-related harm at both an individual and population level, much focus within the literature has been dedicated to assessing factors that contribute towards such harm.

One such proposed factor is gambling marketing which is shown to normalise gambling within sporting environments [ 4 , 5 ], influence children to gamble [ 6 ], encourage individuals to gamble when they are aiming to quit [ 7 ] and encourage individuals to place more risky bets [ 8 ]. The gambling industry also invests a lot of money into marketing, with £8.3 million a week spent on paid for television advertising [ 9 ]. As such, it is important that research explores the role marketing has upon individuals’ behaviour and the potential to cause harm. However, assessing the impact of marketing upon gambling behaviour proves to be methodologically challenging due to the wide-ranging marketing strategies employed [ 6 ] and the fact that marketing is just one of many factors that could influence gambling behaviour. Whilst carefully designed experimental studies can demonstrate how specific aspects of marketing may be harmful to gamblers within a simulated gambling environment, there are questions over whether such findings would replicate in a real-world setting. There has some encouraging success with longitudinal research highlighting increased spending related to increased exposure to gambling marketing, as well as the most influential types of marketing inducements [ 10 ]. However, to develop a more holistic understanding of the role marketing has within an individual’s gambling behaviour, it is important to understand how marketing is perceived by bettors.

Despite this, there are only a limited number of studies which have explored the perceived impact of gambling marketing qualitatively. For example, semi-structured interviews with 25 Swedish disordered gamblers found advertising was perceived to increase their gambling problems, due to triggering impulses to gamble and creating difficulties in following through on a decision to cease gambling [ 7 ]. More recently, focus groups with 43 treatment-seeking disordered gamblers in Spain explored themes around the perceived impact of marketing on their gambling behaviour [ 11 ]; participants found price-related gambling promotions to be particularly persuasive by prompting them to calculate the potential advantage to be gained in accepting such offers. Additionally, advertising was stated to be effective in instigating the uptake of a new gambling product and also caused anticipatory anxiety in situations where gamblers expected to encounter gambling advertising.

However, these studies only focus on how marketing influences those who have been diagnosed with gambling disorder. Considering gambling-related harms occur across the spectrum of problematic gambling behaviour [ 12 ] and research demonstrating that marketing can prompt riskier gambling behaviour regardless of problem gambling levels [ 13 ], more recent research has explored attitudes and opinions towards marketing in those who gamble frequently but do not have a diagnosis of gambling disorder. Recent qualitative studies in the UK have highlighted a range of key findings on perceptions of gambling marketing from such populations: including the frequency at which individuals report seeing gambling advertising, its normalising effect within society, the attractiveness of inducements within gambling and the lack of effectiveness of safer gambling messaging [ 14 , 15 ]. A grounded theory approach was also taken in an Australian study and highlighted the key component of betting-related responses to wagering inducements was through using them to minimize their losses [ 16 ]. Together, these studies demonstrate that taking a qualitative approach allows gamblers to expand on how they view gambling marketing and how it might affect their gambling behaviour. However, the experience of gambling and the general relationship between gamblers and gambling marketing strategies is unique to each individual, and highly context specific [ 17 ], and so, it is important to encapsulate these individual nuances through idiographic, qualitative means [ 18 ].

One qualitative approach that is useful in understanding how individuals interpret experiences within their lives is Interpretative Phenomenological Analysis (IPA). The phenomenological nature of IPA ensures that such research revolves around developing an understanding of how people individually make sense of their social world and its experiences; [ 19 ]. As such, IPA is a commonly employed method within gambling research [ 20 – 23 ], due to its focus on the individual as well as the wider homogenous population experiencing certain phenomena [ 19 ]. Within the current study, the use of IPA will not objectively measure the impact of gambling marketing upon behaviour, but instead explore how frequent gamblers make sense of the role marketing plays within their gambling lives. This is important to consider because the impact of more subtle marketing strategies [ 24 ] is not objectively measurable at the individual level and therefore encouraging reflection upon such strategies is key to understanding how gamblers perceive and engage with them. For example, exploiting probability biases in gamblers’ behaviour may increase the amount of money spent by gamblers, but the gambler still engages in a conscious decision (accessible to phenomenological reflection) that the advertised odds look better than an alternative. It is also difficult to untangle the impact of other marketing strategies due to their highly integrative nature. Whilst such methods may be criticised from a positivist viewpoint as being too subjective, interpretation is actively encouraged within IPA as a means of exploring feelings, emotions and meanings [ 25 ]. Furthermore, the experience of marketing on gamblers is inherently subjective, meaning that the only way to adequately account for it is to explore gamblers’ personal accounts of such phenomena.

Therefore, the aim of the current study is to use IPA to answer the research question ‘ how do frequent gamblers perceive gambling marketing and make sense of its role in their behaviour ? ’ .

The current study will utilise a qualitative approach which will flexibly follow the IPA methodology. IPA in the current context aligns with a critical realist approach [ 26 ]; realist insofar as we hold that participants experience real effects of marketing on their thinking and behaviour which can be recounted; critical insofar as the explanations of such experiences are likely affected by self-presentation concerns. The phenomenological aspect of IPA is also valuable in gambling research [ 27 ], as it is important to explore and understand how certain phenomena are personally experienced and understood. IPA is idiographic in nature and is therefore useful when exploring complex social phenomena by identifying individual idiosyncrasies in behaviour and experience [ 28 ]. IPA is therefore considered more appropriate than other qualitative approaches, mainly due to its dual-analytic approach, which focuses on idiographic accounts, as well as an overall patterning of meaning across participant accounts [ 19 , 29 ].

Participants

Ten participants were recruited to take part in the study via purposeful sampling, as is typical in IPA [ 19 ]. Emphasis was placed on the importance of recruiting participants that offer a detailed insight into a particular experience, and therefore a homogenous sample was sought [ 19 ]. The size of the sample is deemed less important in IPA, with the concept of data saturation argued to be problematic within such an idiographic analysis [ 30 ]. Sample size was instead guided by recommendations for doctoral IPA research from leading researchers in the area [ 19 ]. The inclusion criteria for taking part in the study was that participants had to be frequent gamblers between the age of 18 and 34, as individuals from this group report gambling mostly in response to marketing [ 31 ].

In the absence of a consistent definition within the literature [ 32 – 34 ], frequent gambling was classified as gambling on three days a week or more. Several recruitment strategies were employed for this investigation, including advertisements on a university campus, on social media, and among local bookmakers. Participants were compensated with a £15 Amazon voucher for taking part in the study.

Table 1 outlines demographic information for all recruited participants, including age, sex, employment status, ethnicity, relationship status and participant scores on the Problem Gambling Severity Index [PGSI] [ 35 ].

• PPT PowerPoint slide
• PNG larger image
• TIFF original image

https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0287393.t001

Data collection

The study received full ethical approval from the Northumbria University postgraduate research ethics committee (REF—12156). Upon obtaining written informed consent from each participant, semi-structured interviews were used to collect data. Participants were informed they were free to leave the interview at any point, however nobody chose to do so. Interviews were conducted on a university campus in 2019 and 2020 by researcher SH and lasted between 40 and 70 minutes. The main aim of interviews within IPA research is to allow the participant a platform to provide rich and detailed first-person accounts of a phenomena [ 36 ]. Such methods can often uncover elements of reality that we are not able to empirically capture, therefore providing ontological depth [ 37 ]. This is particularly relevant to the current study given the need to explore gamblers’ personal accounts and experience of marketing strategies, especially considering the need to investigate the potential cause-and-effect relationship between marketing and disordered gambling that may exists at this personal level.

The interview schedule ( osf.io/8c9jg ) consisted of open-ended questions, alongside relevant prompts and examples of gambling marketing that were shown to participants during the interview. The final schedule consisted of 12 questions, and represented four main categories: personal gambling history, television advertisements, social media marketing and gambling within sport. Such categories allowed the researcher to steer the participants towards discussing experiences of certain types of marketing, whilst retaining the flexibility needed to pursue any interesting topics of discussion that arose through the course of the interview.

Data analysis

The interviews were transcribed verbatim by the lead researcher (SH) and the data was analysed using IPA, following guidelines of lead researchers within the area [ 19 ]. The first stages within the analysis process were to actively listen to each interview read the transcript numerous times, and make exploratory notes on any areas of interest within the transcript. Notes made at this stage were a mixture of descriptive comments, which gave accounts of how participants discussed gambling marketing, and more conceptual comments, which explored the context in which these discussions were embedded. It is argued that this allows for identification of more abstract concepts that assist the researcher in making sense of the participant’s lived experience through ‘emergent themes’, hence representing the ‘double hermeneutic’ approach involved in IPA [ 19 ]. Emergent themes were thus generated on a case-by-case basis from these exploratory notes and were clustered to create a thematic structure for each participant, capturing the different ways individual participants thought about gambling marketing. A short summary of the findings was then written up to revisit at a later stage of the analysis.

This process was repeated for each of the ten interviews carried out. The researcher used the individual summary of findings to uncover commonalities between emergent themes. Within this process, some themes were clustered together to create an overarching theme. Additionally, some themes were collapsed into a pre-existing theme which subsequently became an overarching theme. Within this theme development, it was important to ensure that the themes generated were theoretically distinct from one another. This allowed for a final thematic structure to be produced, which accounted for shared experience whilst also maintaining the idiographic nature of the analysis. A full analytic trail is accessible through the Open Science Framework ( osf.io/utzds/ ).

Role of the researcher

As previously noted, a key aspect of IPA interviewing is that participant is provided a platform to openly discuss their experiences of a particular phenomenon [ 19 ]. Most of the recruited participants were the same sex as the interviewer (SH) and were around a similar age and such methods of peer-interviewing allowed for a rapport to be developed that encouraged detailed experiential responses from participants [ 38 ]. The different stages of data analysis, as described previously, were all documented and are available to view online ( osf.io/utzds/ ), allowing for analytical transparency to be established [ 39 ]. Finally, a second researcher (GP) reviewed the analysis to ensure findings were grounded in the experiences of participants.

Three final themes were developed through the analysis that encapsulate how regular gamblers understand the role gambling marketing plays within their behaviour. The first theme ‘taking advantage of gambling marketing for personal gain’ explains how participants view marketing as something to be exploited for their own personal gain to increase their own chances of winning. The second theme ‘gambling marketing as a test of a gambler’s self-control’ covers how participants feel tempted to gamble by certain types of gambling marketing and how this is particularly risky for those who are vulnerable. The final theme ‘safer gambling messages perceived as ineffective’ describes the lack of trust and confidence participants feel towards safer gambling messages.

Theme 1: Exploiting gambling marketing for personal gain

Throughout the interviews, all participants discussed ways that they can take advantage of gambling marketing to enhance their gambling experience or increase their chances of gambling success. As such, marketing was presented as something which, under a skilled and considered approach, could be beneficial to individual gamblers. For example, numerous participants demonstrated how they were able to use marketing offers to reduce the risk associated with their gambling behaviour.

‘It’s about getting as much as you can from as little as possible , erm , so I want to say Betway are offering if you have a £10 bet ante-post–so before the market before Tuesday you’ll get a £10 free bet for each day of the festival , so something like that . I’ll have a tenner on something beforehand that I think is a banker and then I’ll have a free £10 bet Tuesday , Wednesday , Thursday , Friday , so it’s a race covered everyday cause it’s a free bet . Normally I wouldn’t probably bet £10 on that race but cause its free it’s easier to , it’s easier to justify , I don’t have to justify it cause it’s their money . ’– Harry (male, PGSI score = 6)

In placing an initial qualifying bet, Harry is able to ‘earn’ a series of free bets to use on the racing festival. Through stating that these free bets will cover a race every day, it is implied that these free bets afford him the opportunity to maintain a certain frequency to his betting over the course of the festival whilst minimising his risk of losing large sums of money. Interestingly, he then states that he does not need to justify his betting behaviour when betting with free bets, suggesting an internal conflict around levels of spending which usually exists when spending actual money on gambling. So, whilst the initial suggestion from Harry is that the uptake of such offers is to cleverly reduce the financial risk associated with his gambling, a more detailed interpretation highlights how free bets alleviate his internal conflicts around levels of spending on gambling whilst continuing to actively gamble. James similarly puts forward the value in taking advantage of free bets offers to reduce financial risk, commenting upon ‘the lack of pressure’ they feel when betting with free bets. However, when questioned whether their strategy differed when betting with free bets, he explained how free bets led to making riskier gambling choices.

‘ I went to Aspers the casino in [RETRACTED] and they give me like a £5 free bet and , er , I remember the dealer had like a , I had like a four and I had 15 off my two cards and I’d usually stay , I wouldn’t , I’d just leave it but I just thought it’s £5 , hit me again like that sort of thing so it changed my , my strategy , I lost my strategy because it was free , like cause I thought I’m not gonna lose like I’m never gonna lose cause like , and then you do lose cause you put another bet on and do the same . ’— James (male, PGSI score = 10)

The increased freedom which accompanies the lack of financial risk when using free bets allows James to take a riskier approach within his game of blackjack. However, changes to his betting strategy continue when he starts to gamble with his own money, something which he attributes to the feeling that he cannot lose whilst betting with the free bet. This indicates that emotional states that are present when betting with free bets, such as a lack of fear of losing money, can extend beyond the period in which they are using the free bet. As such, whilst the initial purpose of engaging with the marketing offer may be to reduce risk, it may result in riskier behaviour in the long term.

Most participants also discussed ways that they took advantage of gambling marketing to increase their chances of making profit when gambling, such as signing up for multiple bookmakers to take advantage of the sign-up offers, exemplified here by Daniel.

‘I do have accounts , but I don’t really use them . I use SkyBet as my main one , my go to and then probably PaddyPower’s like sort of like another one that I use but apart from them two I don’t actively bet with anybody else . I just used to do the join offers and see if I can like rinse , basically rinse them for some money and then just take off , off into the sunset .’—Daniel (PGSI score = 3)

Despite only betting regularly with two bookmakers, Daniel has signed up to others to make profit from their sign-up offers. Such offers are thus presented as a one-time opportunity for him to exploit marketing to secure profits from bookmakers he wouldn’t normally use. This conveys the idea that sign-up marketing offers can be exploited by savvy gamblers as part of a wider gambling strategy to increase the chances of making money through gambling. David highlights a further example of this strategy, explaining how price boosted bets can increase the value of certain bets to the point where the implied probability of the odds is lower than their perceived likelihood of the event occurring.

‘Before I even see the odds you know like , I’ve got like an opinion or whatever it is but sometimes you see the odds and you think the odds are really good and then you know when you see a boost you might think , even if I’m not , even if I don’t think that’s going to happen the odds are you know , they sort of outweigh the sort of chance of it not happening so , it may make me place a bet , especially if I’m sort of on the , you know , on the fence on it I see better odds and I think , oh might as well’— David (PGSI score = 9)

Through comparing his pre-conceived judgements of how likely a bet is to win against how likely the advertised odds suggest it is to win, David reaches a judgement on whether the bet represents good value. Boosted odds make bets more appealing and push him towards betting on them even if he does not think the bet is likely to win. This therefore depicts the idea that knowledgeable gamblers can search for bets where the odds are in their favour over the bookmaker to secure profit over an extended period of time.

Theme 2: Gambling marketing as a test of self-control

Despite the consensus amongst participants that marketing could be exploited for personal gain, there was also an agreement that marketing acted as a test of their control of their gambling behaviour. Most participants interviewed described how marketing acted as temptation or as a reminder to the gambler, with Mark stating that marketing offers draw him back into gambling after deciding to stop due to financial concerns:

‘I’ll get like obviously marketing , like I get texts off like Ladbrokes and Coral and that , like giving me offers and that and , erm , when I stop I sort of find it like I don’t ever get like an urge in my head to go and splash a load of money but I sort of think I , I’ll do that it’s just a bit of fun init and then sort of progressively gets a bit more and more like progressive’– Mark, (PGSI score = 10)

It is evident that there is a disconnect between Mark’s reasons for gambling and his actual behaviour. Whilst acknowledging that his gambling behaviour escalates to levels that he feels uncomfortable with, he struggles to maintain his attempts to stop gambling due to the enjoyment he associates with the activity. Marketing is identified as something which leads him to start gambling again after choosing to stop, implying that marketing offers act as temptation by reminding him of the enjoyment that he gets from gambling. Marketing therefore plays a key role in establishing a cycle of behaviour whereby attempts to stop gambling are prevented from being successful by acting as a reminder of the perceived positive aspects of gambling. Numerous participants also discussed how the high frequency of gambling marketing within their everyday lives made it hard for them to switch off from gambling.

‘I think I touched on it before where they’ve got like live odds on things so if you’re busy watching a game or whatever things like that I quite often , erm , make us actually go put a bet on or at least have a look so I might not put that exact bet on but I might go have a look and see what other bets are on of like a similar ilk . ’— Connor (PGSI score = 6)

Connor explains how seeing marketing during live sport encourages him to bet, even if he is not interested in the specific bet that is being advertised. This indicates an aversion of focus when watching sport from watching for enjoyment to thinking about what bets could be placed on the game by initiating an evaluation of the advertised bet. Marketing therefore acts as a reminder to the participant of the possibility of gambling on the event that they are watching. Additionally, James discussed how marketing schemes used within casinos glamourise gambling and encourage increased spending.

‘Say I was on four points for the month and there was only a few days left I’d probably just want to get up to that tier because I’ve seen people who are obviously at these tiers and they make them feel like celebrities , like even their drinks come in a fancier glass , erm , they , they get a valet who’ll come and take their coat and they come over every five minutes is everything ok and you , your card even looks different just little things , like mine has just got white card and they’ll have like a matt black card and it just looks , it’s just the whole , it’s like fashion isn’t it you try and look better and then you feel more important and you spend more money . ’— James (PGSI score = 10)

James explains tiered marketing scheme whereby gamblers receive differing levels of perks based upon their levels of spending. Whilst acknowledging that such marketing schemes aim to keep the gambler spending, he states that he would be tempted to spend more money to reach the higher tiers if he could afford it due to the celebrity-like treatment that the higher tiers receive. This suggests that the temptation provided by such schemes act by playing upon perceptions of self-worth, making higher spending gamblers feel more important and elevating their social status within the gambling environment.

Despite the acknowledgment that marketing acts as temptation to gamble, most participants stated that advertising did not have any serious impacts upon their gambling behaviour. Instead, most of their concerns around marketing were related to those who they saw as having problematic personalities or who were problem gamblers. For example, in response to a question on what makes a gambler vulnerable, something he previously established as a risk factor for marketing, Tom responds that vulnerability refers to a lack of control over spending, particularly for individuals with major financial responsibilities.

‘Maybes someone that’s got less control over how much money they’re wanting to be putting into their gambling accounts , certainly I know cause obviously still living at home being a student I don’t necessarily have a lot of outgoings of my money so , erm , so maybe when I’ve got more responsibilities like a house and things like that , er , and people that are also in that situation when they maybe don’t have as much disposable income to be gambling with I think that’s when it can become a little bit more irresponsible they’re kind of targeting their adverts at people who need their money for other things . ’— Tom (PGSI score = 4)

This indicates that gambling advertising triggers those who cannot control their gambling behaviour into spending money that they cannot afford to spend. In distancing himself from such a lack of control or financial responsibilities, Tom suggests that any dangers of gambling marketing do not apply to himself. So, whilst marketing serves as temptation to gamble, the severity of the negative impacts that it can have upon behaviour depends upon individual factors to each gambler. This view is supported by Connor, who argues advertising targets individuals with addictive personalities.

‘I do know plenty people that have quite addictive personalities so the more that they are targeted by gambling companies the more potential there is for them to , er , to kind of succumb to that kind of demand I guess , erm , but like I say not really for me personally , but I definitely know people that would be sucked in by those kind of adverts . ’– Connor (PGSI score = 6)

In responding to an advert shown by the interviewer, Connor argues that the advert would not make him gamble but that he knows other people who would be drawn into betting when viewing it. The use of the metaphor ‘sucked in by those kind of adverts’ presents marketing as a trap designed to lure a specific sub-group of gamblers into gambling. Whilst this acknowledges the dangers of gambling marketing, it places the responsibility of avoiding such negative consequences on each individual gambler. Through describing the limited impact of advertising upon his own behaviour, Connor implies a superior level of self-control over his gambling behaviour compared to other people that he knows. As such, this suggests that the risks of gambling marketing only exist for those who are not in control of their behaviour and cannot resist the temptation to gamble evoked by such marketing.

Theme 3: Safer gambling messages perceived as ineffective

The final theme developed from the interviews covered the perception amongst most participants that safer gambling messages lack effectiveness. Concerns were expressed over the content of safer gambling messages, both in terms of the lack of useful information and the uneven balance between prompting people to gamble and promoting safer gambling. For example, Harry discussed how current safer gambling messages within marketing campaigns fail to provide gamblers with the relevant information to reduce the risk associated with their gambling behaviour.

‘There isn’t many promoted ways of safer gambling , it’s just like when you stop having fun stop betting but there isn’t like a , this is a way of trying to reduce your risk and like if you’ve got an addiction how to help yourself without having to go through all that , there isn’t really much guidance on starting safe and not waiting until you’re five-thousand pound in debt to try and become safe . ’ —Harry (PGSI score = 6)

Harry discusses how the ‘when the fun stops stop’ safer gambling slogan lacks effectiveness due to an absence of practical application. In highlighting examples where more focused and informative safer gambling advice would be useful for gamblers, this emphasises that the complexity of promoting safer gambling cannot be covered by one uniform slogan. This is because the advice needed for someone beginning to gamble is completely different from the help needed for someone who is experiencing harm from gambling. Building upon this, Chris highlighted the lack of focus on safer gambling with gambling marketing.

‘I feel like the whole safe gambling’s just , erm , a bit of like a bit of a blanket over it all sort of thing , like you can easily just rub it off straight away and you wouldn’t notice that it wasn’t there like , I mean the gamble responsibly bit on the end of the advert I , I think you’ve already targeted someone by giving the odds or the boost or something in the advert I think with that at the end of it you’ve already hooked them— Chris (PGSI score = 8)

Chris describes how he sees safer gambling messages within marketing as ineffective as they are usually incorporated at the end of an advert, after the company has advertised an appealing bet or offer. Safer gambling messaging within marketing are therefore seen as an afterthought and, as such, he pays little attention to it. Taken together, both previous extracts highlight that gamblers struggle to connect with safer gambling messages due to the way safer gambling content is included within marketing campaigns. Additionally, there were also concerns as to the sincerity of safer gambling messages within marketing from gambling operators.

‘I’m not necessarily sure it’s the best message coming from the people that are producing it themselves . I think it should be more like a government thing if , or actually made into a law or something like that , erm , because it’s so accessible and it just seems mad if the people that are running are it are necessarily the ones responsible , I dunno it’s a bit like if you were making sweets why should , you’re not really gonna decide that you’re gonna add less sugar or something like that I don’t know I just , it doesn’t seem necessarily like it’s the right people to be making a decision on it when they’re gonna be biased about it anyway . ’— Charlotte (PGSI score = 2)

Charlotte expresses concern over gambling operators including safer gambling content within their marketing, instead stating a preference for information to come from a less biased source. This indicates a lack of trust in gambling operators to provide useful safer gambling advice, since they stand to financially benefit from riskier gambling behaviour. It also implies that the effectiveness of messages used is further limited by the very fact they are viewed as a biased source. Essentially, if they do not believe that operators want their customers to gamble in a safe and controlled manner, then they will not follow any safer gambling advice given within their marketing.

Another way that safer gambling messages lacked effectiveness was the common misconception that safer gambling is a reactionary measure aimed at helping those who are addicted, rather than a general principle for all gamblers to follow. For example, Connor argues safer gambling adverts are ineffective as they won’t help those who are addicted.

‘I think that people with the problem are the people that are addicted so you’ve got to tackle , I feel like the solution has got to be a bit more of a harder one I mean like yes you can relate to those things and but like just because a pundit said you shouldn’t make a , put a bet on because you’ve lost the last , you’re on a losing streak or whatever , it doesn’t really make it , especially that one where it’s saying don’t bet when you’re drunk but it , when you’re drunk you’ve got less control anyways so whether that’s at the forefront of your mind I’m not really sure , er , I’m not really sure that it works at all to be honest . ’— Connor (PGSI score = 6)

In framing their response to the question of the advert’s effectiveness in relation to how it may impact individuals experiencing gambling problems, Connor implies that the purpose of these adverts is to get disordered gamblers to identify and change their problematic behaviour. As such, safer gambling messages are seen as irrelevant for those who do not identify their behaviour as problematic as they do not feel the need to change their behaviour.

Contribution to existing theory and literature

The current findings supported a recently published interview study which also investigated sports bettors’ perceptions of gambling marketing within Great Britain [ 15 ], in that marketing offers were seen to reduce risk. However, whilst that study explained how gambling promotions decreased feelings of risk associated with a particular bet, the current study highlights how gamblers feel as though they can carefully take advantage of marketing offers to reduce the overall risk associated with their gambling behaviour. A deeper interpretation of the data highlighted how this reduction of risk appears to alleviate internal conflicts around the frequency of gambling behaviour. Such an internal conflict can be seen as an example of cognitive dissonance [ 40 ], whereby the frequency of their gambling behaviour may differ from their perception of what a ‘safe’ frequency of gambling is. Therefore, engaging with marketing offers to reduce risk may allow gamblers to employ a form of internal self-justification, whereby attitudes are altered to make negative consequences seem more tolerable and reduce states of cognitive dissonance [ 41 ].

It was also highlighted that participants viewed certain types of marketing as being free of risk and therefore allowing greater freedom to choose bets with longer odds. This finding is supported by experimental research that found that participants chose significantly larger odds when a betting incentive was offered [ 13 ]. Interestingly, it was suggested that free bet offers can lead to continued choices of longer odds bets due to emotional states extending beyond the use of the inducement. This may be explained by research which has demonstrated a relationship between the value of expected winnings and subjective measures of excitement, as well as increased heart rates [ 42 ]. Therefore, if individuals experience the excitement of larger potential winnings, this may encourage them to choose such bets again in the future. This highlights how the intended use of marketing offers may not always align with the outcomes of interacting with such offers. Whilst gamblers may think of marketing as a tool by which they can reduce their risk, it may lead to riskier behaviour over a longer time period due to the increased volatility of bets with higher odds.

A further way in which gamblers reported taking advantage of marketing within the study was through making judgements as to when offers increased the value of bets. One participant discussed how some offers can boost the odds of bets to odds which give a lower implied probability than his perceived likelihood of the bet winning. Such a finding aligns with a recent systematic review which concluded that sports bettors attributed more importance to skill than luck in the outcomes of betting [ 43 ]. The current study builds upon these findings to highlight how such perceptions of gambling as a skilled activity can impact how gamblers interact with marketing offers. This is a concern as the same review found that sports bettors perform no better with their choices of bets than random selection [ 43 ]. Additionally, sports bettors have been found to overestimate the probability of more complex bets often included in marketing offers [ 8 ]. So, whilst bettors may think of marketing as something which can be exploited for financial gain, this may not always be possible due to an overestimation of their own skill. Additionally, sports betting adverts use a dual persuasion strategy, to enhance perceived control and reduce perceived risk [ 44 ]. The findings of the current study suggest that such persuasion strategies are successful as they are reflected within the way gamblers think about gambling marketing.

Participants within the study acknowledged the risk associated with gambling marketing. A number of participants discussed how marketing drew them back into gambling after a period of abstinence, suggesting marketing acted as challenge to maintaining a change in behaviour. For example, one participant described how marketing reminded him of the enjoyment he would get from gambling after choosing to not gamble for a while and another discussed trying to actively avoid marketing during periods they were uncomfortable with their own gambling behaviour. Previous qualitative research found similar findings in that gambling adverts acted as a reminder to gamble and initiated gambling sessions [ 7 , 45 ], however this finding this was mainly amongst treatment-seeking disordered gamblers whereas nobody in the current study had a diagnosis of gambling disorder. Taken together, these findings highlight how marketing is perceived to prevent sustained behaviour change across the spectrum of gambling-related harm.

One potential theoretical explanation as to why marketing may prevent gamblers from maintaining behaviour change relates to the role of self-efficacy in leading models of behaviour change, such as the Transtheoretical Model [ 46 ] and the Theory of Planned Behaviour [ 47 ]. Both models argue that, for behaviour change to be successful, individuals must believe themselves capable of maintaining such a change. Within the Transtheoretical Model specifically, it is argued that behaviour change is often unsuccessful when feelings of temptation outweigh an individual’s confidence in their ability to maintain a behaviour. Therefore, seeing gambling marketing may increase temptation to gamble above an individual’s level of self-efficacy, prompting them to start gambling again. This is particularly relevant given that research has shown that advertisements include perceived control enhancing content [ 44 ]. Self-efficacy may therefore be an inducement to gamble when the efficacy is linked to a gambling outcome yet can act as a preventative factor when efficacy is linked to the ability to avoid temptation.

Alternatively, the Theory of Planned Behaviour suggests that self-efficacy is just one important element of engaging in a particular behaviour. Subjective norms, the extent to which an individual believes others approve of a behaviour, and an individual’s own attitudes towards a behaviour are also important in producing behavioural intentions. Given that gambling marketing has been highlighted as a major factor in normalising gambling within society [ 5 ], and that gambling is often presented positively in marketing, this could act to lower the desire to maintain changes in behaviour by increasing positive attitudes towards gambling. In addition to this, gambling in response to marketing may be considered a form of reminder impulse purchasing [ 48 , 49 ] and a recent meta-analysis highlighted a link between positive emotions and increased impulse purchasing [ 50 ]. So, marketing which aims to increase positive feelings towards gambling may not only lower desire to maintain changes in gambling behaviour but also increase the temptation to engage within impulse purchasing.

However, despite acknowledging the risks associated with gambling marketing, participants described marketing as only being a serious problem for those with a diagnosis of gambling disorder or with a specific type of personality. An explanation for such an argument is the third-person effect, which refers to an individual’s belief that mass media messages have a larger impact on others than themselves [ 51 ]. However, given that participants were keen to stress the rationality of their behaviour in comparison to the perceived vulnerabilities of specific types of people, their explanation moves beyond the third-person effect. By distancing themselves from any harm arising from gambling marketing, participants can protect a positive identity and stress rationality and self-control as markers of positive identity in contrast to disordered gamblers. One possible explanation for this is that it is an example of a fundamental attribution error [ 52 ], whereby individuals over-emphasise personality characteristics over situational explanations when explaining the behaviour of others.

Alternatively, if this distinction between their behaviour and others’ behaviour is more intentional, this could be seen as being rooted in Social Identity Theory [ 53 ]. This theory argues individuals attribute negative characteristics to an out-group, in this case ‘vulnerable gamblers’, in order to enhance their own self-image. Such categorisation of gamblers into two distinct subgroups of ‘safe’ and ‘vulnerable’ gamblers can be seen as a reflection of the narrative around individual control which is often supported by the gambling industry [ 54 ]. This is a concern since gambling does not only harm those with a diagnosis of gambling disorder [ 12 ]. Also, research has found that certain aspects of gambling marketing led to riskier behaviour regardless of disordered gambling category [ 13 ]. So, despite thinking of marketing as something which only has a negative impact on others who cannot control their gambling, this may not accurately reflect the impact marketing has on gamblers’ behaviour.

The issue of identity is also relevant within the finding that safer gambling messages incorporated into gambling marketing are perceived to be largely ineffective. One reason for this was the perception of safer gambling as a reactionary measure aimed at helping those who are disordered gamblers. If gamblers are motivated to maintain a positive identity of being a safe gambler, then safer gambling messages are not going to be perceived as being relevant due to targeting the wrong identity. Participants also expressed concerns over the sincerity of industry-led safer gambling messages due to the concept of safer gambling not aligning with their financial interests as a business. There were also concerns around their sincerity due to these messages usually being included as an afterthought within advertisements of gambling products and are their infrequency in comparison to gambling adverts. It is argued that source credibility, which incorporates both trustworthiness and expertise, is a key factor in whether health messages are accepted by their target population [ 55 ]. Thus, if gamblers perceive that the gambling industry is not a trustworthy source to deliver safer gambling messages then they will not accept or process the content of the messages.

Methodological considerations and evaluation

One key methodological consideration of using IPA is to purposively recruit a homogenous sample [ 19 ]. The current study achieved this by recruiting in the age range that most frequently report gambling in response to marketing [ 31 ] and who gambled frequently but did not have a diagnosis of gambling disorder. Such levels of homogeneity within the sample is a strength of the study and help addressed previously discussed limitations in the research area. This is important given the large number of individuals who meet the criteria for being at-risk gamblers within Great Britain [ 56 ]. However, an inherent limitation of such a sampling approach means you may not pick up on important experiences of the phenomena in other relevant demographics. For example, the sample recruited was largely white-British, male, undergraduate students and between the ages of 18 and 23. In particular, those aged 24 to 34 are also included in the age category of those who gamble most in response to gambling marketing and are likely to be more experienced gamblers than their younger counterparts. Therefore, the current study may have missed some valuable experiences of how these bettors think about gambling marketing. Further qualitative research should explore how other demographic groups think about gambling marketing.

A further criticism often made of IPA as a methodology is that is overly subjective and therefore unscientific [ 57 ]. However, such levels of interpretation are actively encouraged within IPA as a means of exploring feelings, emotions, and meanings [ 25 ]. Additionally, care was taken to ensure transparency around the analysis process through documenting the different stages of the analysis ( https://osf.io/utzds/ ). Whilst the lack of member checking may be considered a limitation of the current study, credibility of the analysis was instead strengthened through a second researcher (GP), who was unfamiliar with gambling research, reviewing the analysis to ensure that findings were grounded in the experiences of participants.

Future research suggestions

Given the perceived lack of effectiveness of current safer gambling strategies identified here, future research should explore the impact of new safer gambling strategies upon gambling behaviour. For example, concerns were highlighted about both the sincerity and placement of safer gambling messages within marketing. Therefore, future research should assess the impact of safer gambling messages from impartial sources and messages presented separately from gambling marketing. There has also been recent research showing how pictograms increased the perceived risk associated with the products and improved discrimination of risk between products [ 58 ]. Future studies should therefore test the impact of including these types of images within gambling marketing to improve risk perception, however there should also be an assessment on whether this directly impacts upon gambling behaviour.

The current study aimed to explore how frequent gamblers think about gambling marketing and the impact it has upon behaviour. Participants disclosed that marketing was something that they felt they could exploit for their own personal gain, either through increasing the value of bets or by reducing the risk associated with betting. However, they also acknowledged that marketing acted as a test of their own self-control by tempting them to bet in situations where they had not planned on doing so. Despite this, participants were keen to stress that marketing had little serious impact upon their behaviour and that marketing was only a risk factor for other people who were seen to be more vulnerable to developing disordered gambling. Finally, participants saw safer gambling messages within marketing as being ineffective due to the perceived insincerity of incorporating safer gambling content withing gambling advertisements. These findings highlight the need for improved safer gambling strategies that move beyond individual responsibility. A public health approach to reducing gambling-harm should focus on eliminating control-enhancing aspects of gambling marketing and products, such as free bets and money-back offers. There should also be a rethink on the use of safer gambling messaging within marketing as it requires an evaluation of perceived risk amongst gamblers. Therefore, such messages appear to miss their intended audience if perceived risk does not align with objective levels of risk.

Acknowledgments

Firstly, we would like the thank the participants in this study for so kindly sharing their personal experiences during the interview process. We’d also like to extend thanks to our reviewers for their informative feedback throughout the peer-review process.

• 1. Public Health England. Gambling-related harms evidence review: summary. 2021 [cited 18 Oct 2022]. Available: https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/gambling-related-harms-evidence-review/gambling-related-harms-evidence-review-summary#results
• View Article
• PubMed/NCBI
• Google Scholar
• 18. Eatough V, Smith J. Interpretative Phenomenological Analysis. Handbook of Qualitative Psychology. Sage; 2017. Available: https://eprints.bbk.ac.uk/id/eprint/16386/3/16386.pdf
• 19. Smith JA, Flowers P, Larkin M. Interpretative Phenomenological Analysis. London: Sage Publications; 2009.
• 26. Vincent S, O’Mahoney J. Critical Realism and Qualitative Research: An Introductory Overview. The SAGE Handbook of Qualitative Business and Management Research Methods: History and Traditions. London: SAGE Publications Ltd; 2018. pp. 201–216.
• 31. Gambling Commission. Industry Statistics. 2018. Available: http://live-gamblecom.cloud.contensis.com/PDF/survey-data/Gambling-industry-statistics.pdf
• 35. Ferris J, Wynne H. The Canadian problem gambling index. Ottawa, ON: Canadian Centre on Substance Abuse; 2001.
• 37. Archer M, Bhaskar R, Collier A, Lawson T, Norrie A. Critical realism: Essential readings. Routledge; 2013.
• 40. Festinger L. A theory of cognitive dissonance. Stanford university press; 1962.
• 52. Ross L. The Intuitive Psychologist And His Shortcomings: Distortions in the Attribution Process. Advances in experimental social psychology. Elsevier; 1977. pp. 173–220. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0065-2601(08)60357-3
• 53. Tajfel H, Turner JC. The social psychology of intergroup relations. Monterey: Brooks/Cole; 1979.
• 55. Hocevar KP, Metzger M, Flanagin AJ. Source Credibility, Expertise, and Trust in Health and Risk Messaging. Oxford Research Encyclopedia of Communication. Oxford University Press; 2017. https://doi.org/10.1093/acrefore/9780190228613.013.287
• 56. Gambling Commission. Gambling participation in 2019: behaviour, awareness and attitudes. 2020. Available: https://www.gamblingcommission.gov.uk/PDF/survey-data/Gambling-participation-in-2019-behaviour-awareness-and-attitudes-superseded.pdf

Cookies on the Gambling Commission website

The Gambling Commission website uses cookies to make the site work better for you. Some of these cookies are essential to how the site functions and others are optional. Optional cookies help us remember your settings, measure your use of the site and personalise how we communicate with you. Any data collected is anonymised and we do not set optional cookies unless you consent.

You've accepted all cookies. You can change your cookie settings at any time.

Statistics and research release

Understanding how consumers engaged with gambling advertising in 2020

This release uses online survey data to reflect on consumers’ awareness of advertising, social media use and the impact it has in the context of gambling in 2020.

Statistics Statistics and research hub

Collection Consumer gambling behaviour

Series Behaviour, awareness and attitudes

Published on 18 June 2021

Also published recently

• Exploring consumer journeys playing online casino games (excluding slots)
• Exploring consumer journeys using gambling promotional offers and incentives
• Consumer voice - Exploring online staking (2020 research)

Additional data sets in this series

• Gambling advertising and sponsorships widely and frequently reach consumers, with 6 in 10 seeing gambling adverts or sponsorships at least once a week.
• Whereas sponsorships and traditional advertising have been seen by all age groups, online advertising is more likely to be seen by younger adults.
• Just over a third of past 12-month gamblers claimed to have been prompted to spend money on a gambling activity by advertising they had seen in the past 12 months.
• Around one in six adults follow gambling companies on social media. Those that do are more likely to be male, aged 18 to 44 and past four-week gamblers.

The UK advertising market continues to grow, with net advertising spending across all sectors and industries reaching circa £22 billion in 2019 1 . With the arrival of the Covid-19 pandemic however, the advertising landscape has changed significantly with numerous media sectors experiencing a shrink in traditional advertising spend; though increases have been seen with tech platforms such as Google and Facebook 2 .

Consumers are reporting a change in how they consume media, with research from Ofcom demonstrating that the move to online services has accelerated in 2020, with UK adults spending more time online on desktop computers, smartphones or tablets than comparable European countries 3 .

Since March 2020, the COVID-19 pandemic has had a significant impact on the gambling industry with land-based gambling venues instructed to close. In the context of gambling advertising 4 , there have been numerous changes. The Betting and Gaming Council (BGC) announced the removal of TV and radio gaming product advertising during the first national lockdown 5 , and unveiled new measures to stop under 18s from seeing betting advertisements 6 . We have also consulted on the requirement that licensees include consideration of whether there is a need to prevent bonus offers and promotions being sent or applied to individual customers where there are indicators of harm 7 .

This release uses online survey data to reflect on consumers’ awareness of advertising, social media use and the impact it has in the context of gambling in 2020, and builds on a previous release, ‘Taking a more in-depth look at online gambling’ .

About the online survey

The data is based on the Gambling Commission’s quarterly online survey conducted by Yonder Consulting. A nationally representative sample of approximately 8,000 adults aged 18 and over in Great Britain were interviewed during March, June, September and December 2020. All the data was collected during either national or some element of local restrictions.

Approximately 6,000 respondents were asked questions relating to gambling advertising, marketing and social media throughout the March, June and September waves of the online tracker.

Further details on the quarterly online survey methodology can be found in the notes section as follows.

Comparisons to previous years’ data are not always appropriate due to changes to the survey questions and routing.

Gambling Advertising and Sponsorships

Online survey respondents were asked about advertisements and sponsorships to help us understand awareness of gambling related media. Overall, 85% have ever seen gambling adverts or sponsorships, with 83% seeing adverts and 78% seeing any sponsorships. This compares to 87% who had seen advertisements or sponsorships in 2019 (86% had seen any gambling advertisements and 82% had seen any gambling sponsorships).

Defining gambling advertisements and sponsorships in the survey

By gambling advertisements, we mean the promotion of gambling via a variety of media.

By gambling sponsorships, we mean a commercial agreement between a gambling company and another company.

Gambling advertising and sponsorships are widespread, with most consumers reporting having ever seen them, regardless of their age, gender or gambling status

Advertising has been seen by more than 8 in 10 people across all demographic groups. Male gamblers aged 25 to 34 and 45+ are most likely to have ever seen gambling advertising, with 90% and 91% reporting doing so, respectively.

However, when we look at respondents who’ve seen advertising more recently (i.e. at least once a week), differences are more pronounced with males, those in older age groups, and gamblers being more likely to be seeing advertising.

Gambling ads are most commonly seen on TV, with 76% of respondents having ever seen them. This may not, however, come as a surprise given findings from Havas Media which suggest that almost two-thirds (64%) are watching more live TV than they did prior to the COVID-19 outbreak 8 . This is closely followed by gambling sponsorships on the TV, radio or podcasts (67%). The third most common type of advertising seen is gambling sponsorships on sports merchandise (60%).

Once all types of advertising have been combined into online, traditional and sponsorship categories it becomes more evident that respondents are generally more likely to report seeing traditional advertising, followed by sponsorships and online advertising (though all categories of advertising have high visibility). Read definitions for each advertising category .

Males are more likely to report seeing each of these three main types of gambling advertising than their female counterparts. The discrepancy is greatest for online advertising, with almost three-quarters (74%) of males reporting ever seeing gambling ads online compared to 63% among females.

Whilst sponsorships and traditional advertising are consistently seen among all age groups, online advertising is more likely to be seen amongst younger age groups

Whilst both men and women and all age groups are widely aware of traditional gambling advertising and sponsorships, online ad awareness skews noticeably to younger age groups. We can see that for traditional advertising and sponsorships, the proportion of respondents seeing advertising increases slightly with age. However, the opposite is true for online advertising, with those aged 18 to 24 being most likely to see gambling advertising online. This decreases as respondents age, with just over half (55%) of those aged 65+ seeing it. This is consistent with findings from Ofcom’s Technology Tracker, which shows that those aged 55+ are less likely than average to have access to the internet 9 .

Social media and video sharing platforms

Among those active on social media, 19% report following or watching gambling companies

In total, 16% of adults say they follow or interact with gambling companies on any social media or video sharing platform. The most popular platform to do this is Facebook (11%), followed by YouTube, Twitter and Instagram (all 6%). These figures remain consistent with findings from the latest Adult’s Media Use and Attitudes Report (Ofcom, 2021 10 ) which identifies Facebook as having the highest overall use of any social media site or app.

Those who do follow gambling companies on social media are more likely to be male, aged 18 to 44 and to have gambled at least once in the past 4 weeks

It is interesting to note that males, and those in the younger age groups (18 to 44), and past 4 week gamblers are all more likely than average to follow gambling companies on any social media platform. This remains consistent when looking at each individual platform in isolation.

The impact of gambling advertising

Just over a third of past 12-month gamblers have been prompted to spend on gambling activity by a type of advertising in the past 12 months

The type of advertising most likely to prompt gamblers to spend is advertising for a gambling company on TV; unsurprising given that it is the most frequently seen type of advertising. Free bets or money to spend with a gambling company (which can be received through all different types of adverts), are overall more likely to prompt consumers to spend.

In total, 15% of respondents report being prompted to spend on gambling by advertising on social media. This appears to be driven largely by those who follow gambling companies on social media (54%) compared to only 6% among respondents who use social media but do not follow gambling companies.

Approximately a quarter (26%) of those who’ve been prompted to spend by free bets or money to spend with a gambling company have been prompted to start gambling for the first time. Those who have received advertising directly from a gambling company (for example, by email, text message or push notification) are more likely to be prompted to increase their gambling, than start gambling for the first time.

What we learnt

This research reinforces what we already knew – that gambling advertising and marketing activity has a wide reach, encompassing existing gamblers but also lapsed/non-gamblers who may be encouraged to start or restart gambling.

With gambling operators’ marketing across a range of media, from TV ads, to sports team sponsorships, to social media, there is a question about appreciating better the cumulative impact of all this activity on consumers. The effects of gambling advertising may have been potentially exacerbated by the pandemic, where many people have been at home more, watching more live TV, spending more time online and on social media, and have seen their financial circumstances change.

We should be clear – our official statistics on gambling participation don’t indicate an increase in gambling through the pandemic period, in fact the opposite. Similarly, we aren’t seeing an increase in problem gambling rates at a population level. Nonetheless, all who are interested in gambling related trends should be alert to the potential risks of ad exposure to different population groups.

We have recently released data on taking a more in-depth look at online gambling , and intend to publish a further release looking at safer gambling within the coming weeks. This will help to build up a fuller picture of consumer gambling behaviour throughout the pandemic period. And as the country hopefully emerges from the worst impacts of COVID-19 and returns to something approaching normality in the months ahead, we look forward to releasing more research and statistics that help us understand how consumer gambling behaviour has been affected.

Advertising category definitions

• Gambling advertisements online on other platforms (websites)
• Gambling advertisements shown within app games (or similar)
• Gambling adverts sent directly to you via email, text message or app push notification
• Gambling adverts on live streaming or video sharing platforms
• Gambling adverts on social media websites.

Traditional

Gambling advertisements:

• on posters and billboards
• in newspapers
• on the radio

Sponsorships

• associations with sporting competitions
• gambling sponsorships in sports venues
• gambling sponsorships on sports merchandise
• gambling sponsorships on the TV, radio or podcasts.

About the online tracker

The Commission collects in depth data from online gamblers about their online gambling behaviour via a quarterly online tracker, conducted by Yonder Consulting as part of their online omnibus.

The 2020 data is based on a sample of circa 8,000 adults aged 18+ in Great Britain. Fieldwork took place in March, June, September and December with approximately 2,000 interviews per quarter. All waves were completed after the emergence of COVID-19 and the start of the national restrictions on 23 March 2020.

The online survey sample is sourced through Yonder’s panel and the sample is subject to quotas in-line with those used for the Commission’s quarterly telephone survey. In addition, data are weighted which are derived from The Publishers Audience Measurement Company (PAMCO) data, based on a face-to-face random probability sample.

The variables used for weighting are:

• social grade
• working status.

1 Advertising spending in the UK 2024 | Statista (opens in new tab)

2 Charted: UK advertising spend by sector 2020 - Press Gazette (opens in new tab)

3 A nation’s online migration: Ofcom reveals a year lived online - Ofcom (opens in new tab)

4 Gambling advertising in all forms is permitted by the Gambling Act 2005 but is subject to a wide range of controls which reflect the Licensing Objectives. Gambling advertisements cover a variety of gambling activities.

5 BGC members to remove TV and radio gaming… | Betting & Gaming Council (bettingandgamingcouncil.com) (opens in new tab)

6 New rules to stop under-18s seeing betting ads - Betting & Gaming Council (opens in new tab)

7 Remote customer interaction - Consultation and Call for Evidence - The Gambling Commission (opens in new tab)

8 COVID-19: Media Behaviours Reports - Havas Media (opens in new tab)

9 Ofcom technology tracker 2020 UK data tables (opens in new tab)

10 Adult's Media Use and Attitudes report 2020 to 2021 - OFCOM (opens in new tab) .

Data and downloads

M & A participation tables (spreadsheet) XLSX 109.5 kB

We are always keen to hear how these statistics are used and would welcome your views on this publication.

Give us feedback about these statistics .

We are not able to respond to comments but your feedback will help us improve our website.

Complaints and queries

Do not use this form for complaints as we will not reply. If you want to complain about a gambling business or need further help please contact us .

User research

If you want to provide feedback about new services and features, join our user research programme .

This form is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy (opens in new tab) and Terms of Service (opens in new tab) apply.

An official website of the United States government

The .gov means it’s official. Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

The site is secure. The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

• Publications
• Account settings

Preview improvements coming to the PMC website in October 2024. Learn More or Try it out now .

• Advanced Search
• Journal List
• BMC Public Health

Emergent gambling advertising; a rapid review of marketing content, delivery and structural features

Jamie torrance.

Addictions Research Group, School of Psychology and Therapeutic Studies, University of South Wales, Pontypridd, CF37 1DL UK

James Greville

Marie o’hanrahan, nyle davies, gareth roderique-davies, associated data.

Data sharing is not applicable for this review as the procedure did not involve the construction or analysis of a dataset. Supplementary materials relating to the search strategy and a summary of included studies are provided (Additional files  1 & 2 ).

Gambling advertising is well-funded and has become increasingly sophisticated in recent years. As the presence and pervasiveness of gambling advertising increases, there is a corresponding need for empirical understanding of the characteristics and trends associated with emergent gambling advertisements and marketing. However, there is limited data on this rapidly evolving phenomenon.

A rapid review was undertaken of the empirical research (2015–2020) that focused upon the content, delivery and structural features incorporated within emerging gambling advertising.

Twenty-five studies were included in the review. The majority of these studies were conducted in either the UK or Australia; two jurisdictions that have unique and particularly liberal gambling environments. The literature suggests that emergent gambling advertising content is targeted, positively framed and in some instances, may overrepresent riskier bets. The sporting and social media spheres are densely populated with such advertisements that involve both direct and indirect marketing strategies. In relation to the online environment, there is evidence to suggest the emergence of more interactive advertisements that prompt user engagement. In addition, financial incentivisation has diversified and is often subject to strict and esoteric conditions. Despite these emergent trends, little provision is devoted to adequately displaying harm reductive or responsible gambling content within gambling advertising.

Conclusions

Overall, there is a paucity of research and lack of methodological diversity concerning the characteristics of advertising within the literature. The barriers to investigating emerging gambling advertising are discussed alongside future research priorities. It is important for this research area to expand in order to appropriately inform ethical industry marketing and effective harm-reduction strategies. [Pre-registered online via Prospero: CRD42020184349].

Supplementary Information

The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1186/s12889-021-10805-w.

The complexity and availability of gambling continues to grow on an international scale [ 1 , 2 ]. In recent years, there has also been a corresponding increase in the prevalence, diversity and intensity of gambling advertising [ 3 , 4 ]. This expansion is facilitated by significant industry expenditure; especially within jurisdictions that have previously liberalised gambling such as the United Kingdom (UK) and Australia. Estimates indicate that Australian gambling industry spending on marketing and promotion has increased by 33% per year since 2011 to $273 million in 2018 [ 5 ]. UK industry spending grew over 17% per year from 2014 to 2018, reaching an estimated total of £1.5 billion [ 6 ]. This advertising expenditure represents 10.34% of the £14.5 billion gross yield of the UK gambling industry in 2018 [ 7 ]. Such funding has led to the development of sophisticated advertising campaigns that are disseminated across traditional media such as television [ 8 ] and via sports sponsorship [ 4 ]. In addition, these campaigns have resourcefully adapted to the digital sphere via online and social media marketing [ 9 , 10 ]. This shift towards the online environment has granted gambling operators uninterrupted advertising space; especially during the Covid-19 pandemic. Therefore, attempts to curtail TV gambling advertising (as seen within the UK) during periods of lockdown may have little effect on reducing overall exposure amongst young or vulnerable audiences [ 11 ].

Emerging literature has highlighted gambling as a compounding issue of public health [ 12 , 13 ]. The harmful effects of gambling and associated advertising have been suggested to extend beyond populations of disordered gamblers and are apparent across the entire harm-spectrum; including children and young people [ 3 , 14 , 15 ]. Comparable to previously conducted reviews of alcohol and tobacco [ 16 , 17 ], two recently published systematic reviews [ 18 , 19 ] and one narrative review [ 20 ] have indicated that gambling advertising is facilitative of induced gambling intentions or cravings, increased participation and riskier (more impulsive) betting. However, these reviews also identify many of the methodological gaps within the existing gambling advertising research. Within the literature there is an emphasis placed upon the self-reported effects of gambling advertising exposure, especially amongst disordered gamblers. An empirical concentration upon disordered gamblers may pathologize the issue of gambling-harm induced by advertising. This may draw attention away from advertising-induced harm experienced by low-moderate risk gamblers [ 18 ]. Furthermore, the self-reported effects of gambling advertising are often hindered by recall and self-report bias. This may be due (in-part) to the Third Person Effect [ 21 , 22 ] in which individuals are more likely to perceive the impacts of marketing amongst others rather than themselves. In contrast, there is a paucity of research that focuses upon the specific characteristics and mechanisms that underpin emergent gambling advertisements.

There is a growing academic consensus that gambling advertising may incorporate content that is deemed misleading, utilises demographic targeting and uses embedded promotion [ 22 – 24 ]. However, to date, no review has aimed to provide a taxonomy of gambling advertising characteristics. As observed in the movement towards increased control of tobacco advertising [ 25 – 27 ], studies that aim to investigate the specific marketing methods utilised by the industry offer an insightful contribution in the shift towards regulatory reform and industry marketing that is more ethical and transparent. Therefore, the current review of gambling advertising characteristics seeks to complement the existing reviews of advertising effect as well as the future literature. This contribution is also warranted in order to appropriately inform the decisions of policymakers and researchers regarding effective harm-reduction strategies.

Due to the fluctuating methods of gambling advertising that largely remain free from effective regulation [ 28 ], this review aimed to examine the empirical evidence concerning the nature and characteristics of emerging (2015–2020) gambling advertisements. Specifically, this review aimed to investigate:

• The content and narratives incorporated within gambling advertising.
• The methods of gambling advertising delivery and placement.
• The mechanics and structural features of gambling advertising e.g. design, usability and complexity.

Methodology

Due to the fluidity and constant development of the gambling advertising sphere, a rapid review methodology was utilised throughout the literature search. Although there is no single accepted approach, the rapid-review process typically involves the same components as a systematic literature review with limitations imposed on the length (e.g. time spent) and depth (e.g. extent of searching) of the methodology [ 29 ]. Despite the variation in approaches, rapid reviews have been reported to produce equivalent findings to systematic reviews if screening, bias/quality appraisal and data synthesis are addressed with appropriate methodological rigor [ 30 , 31 ]. The protocol for the current review was registered via Prospero ( ID: CRD42020184349 ).

Search strategy

Following PRISMA guidelines [ 32 ], a literature search for peer-reviewed articles published since 2015 (completed June 2020) exploring the content, delivery and characteristics of emergent gambling advertising was conducted (Fig.  1 ). Within the search strategy, operational definitions were created for the terms “advertising”, “marketing” and “promotion”. Advertising was defined as any industry financed communication that utilises varying media sources (such as TV or internet ad space) to encourage engagement with a gambling brand or product. Marketing and promotion were operationalised interchangeably and were defined by broader strategies that aim to encourage gambling brand awareness or indirectly influence user engagement (such as sporting sponsorship or affiliate marketing). Therefore, non-industry funded sharing of gambling-related material (such as the independent social media posts of bettors) were not included in the current search strategy. Two academic literature databases were utilised during the search strategy including PsycInfo (via Proquest) and Web of Science (Science Citation Index Expanded & Social Sciences Citation Index). A further set of records were also accrued using Google Scholar. Boolean operators (AND/OR) were used interchangeably during the search strategy in conjunction with the following terms: gambl*, bet*, casino, sport*, market*, advert*, promot*, content* and strateg*. The details of this search strategy can be found in the Search Strategy Report (see Additional file  1 ). An inclusive approach was undertaken given the general paucity of literature in this field alongside the heterogeneity of the methodologies across emergent studies. Due this heterogeneity, a meta-analysis was not conducted.

Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) flow diagram [ 32 ]

Inclusion/exclusion criteria

Empirical studies (quantitative, qualitative and mixed methods) in the English language were included within the rapid review if they addressed the components, designs, incorporated mechanisms and/or delivery of gambling advertising or marketing. The search was conducted in English as the translation of non-English language articles was unfeasible due to time and economic constraints. Eligible studies were also required to have been published between 01/01/2015 and 02/06/2020. This timeframe was implemented due to the current review focusing upon the characteristics of emergent or recent gambling advertising given how rapidly advertising trends shift and fluctuate. Due to the typical limitations that are placed on the length (time spent) of the rapid review methodology, a practical limit of 5 years was therefore placed on the inclusion criteria. All samples of advertising were eligible for inclusion in order to provide a broad range of synthesised narrative findings. Records were excluded if they were published prior to 2015, were discussion or commentary articles, were not published in the English language, or focused primarily on the self-reported effects of and/or perceptions towards gambling advertising.

Screening and quality assessment

Following the retrieval of records via database searching ( n  = 1353) and Google Scholar ( n  = 16), duplicates were removed, and an initial title screening process was undertaken ( n  = 434) in order to exclude records that were irrelevant or not applicable. The remaining record title and abstracts ( n  = 109) were screened by three reviewers (JT, MOH and ND). To ensure fidelity during this process, the reviewers regularly met to discuss their individual decisions and reasoning behind including or excluding records until consensus was reached. Following this, full-text screening of 35 records took place against the inclusion/exclusion criteria, with consultations carried out among the wider research team. Any disagreements were also addressed by this team until a general consensus had been attained. The research team included (but was not limited to) three senior researchers with experience in both the subject matter and the review process. Full-text screening led to the exclusion of ten records due to them being off-topic ( n  = 7) or conference abstracts ( n  = 3). A final set of empirical records ( n  = 25) underwent quality assessment via the Mixed Methods Appraisal Tool (MMAT) 2018 [ 33 ]. The research team determined that all of the final empirical records were conducted to a good methodological standard according to the MMAT and were subsequently included for full data extraction.

Analysis/synthesis

In order to distinguish appropriate and salient themes within the included articles, narrative synthesis was conducted. This process involved repeated readings of the literature, extracting relevant content, and summarizing this content in tabular format (see Additional file  2 ). This information was then synthesised and organised in order to produce a thematic framework. This framework was used to structure the findings according to themes in line with the research aims of the current review. Narrative synthesis was conducted by JT with regular consultation among the co-authors to ensure the applicability and pertinence of the final themes.

Twenty-five studies were included in the review: 6 qualitative studies; 15 that employed a mixed-methods approach and 4 quantitative studies (see Additional file 2 ). The studies were conducted across four jurisdictions that included the United Kingdom ( n  = 12), Australia ( n  = 9), Sweden ( n  = 1) and cross-culturally between the United Kingdom and Spain simultaneously ( n  = 3). The included studies were categorised across three overarching themes (Table  1 ) in line with the research aims of the current review: 1) Content and narratives 2) Delivery and placement; 3) Structural features and mechanics.

Summary of themes that emerged as a result of narrative synthesis

Content and narratives

The content and narratives that are incorporated into gambling advertising were outlined in 23 studies. Four sub-themes emerged that included: 1) Targeted content that positively frames gambling; 2) Odds-related content and promoting complex bets; 3) Financially Incentivising content; 4) ‘Responsible gambling’ and harm-reductive content.

Targeted content that positively frames gambling

A number of content analyses highlighted the themes and latent messages that were utilised across a range of gambling advertisements that portray gambling as a desirable, trustworthy and fun activity. In relation to casino gambling, a study of UK online casino marketing identified the use of language within advertisements that predominantly orientated positive emotions such as trust and joy [ 34 ]. In-venue casino advertisements were also positively framed. For example, Australian social club (casino) endorsements were found to portray the venues as being accommodating, comfortable and well-equipped [ 35 ]. These advertisements often aimed to emphasise better value for money and attempted to accentuate an increased chance of success in relation to the gambling activities they offered. Potential customers were encouraged to bring their family (including children) to such establishments due to the availability of non-gambling related amenities provided inside [ 35 ]. This positive framing was also observed within online social casino (free-to-play gambling) advertisements in which bright colour schemes and themes associated with glamour and financial success were employed [ 36 ]. Such advertisements were deemed likely to appeal to young people due to the incorporation of cartoon animal characters and novel pop-culture references [ 36 ]. Additional studies of wagering advertising supported this finding by citing the use of content that contained animations, memes, humour and celebrity endorsement within advertisements that may have particular appeal to children and young people [ 37 , 38 ].

In relation to gendered content, one Swedish study of TV marketing indicated that female casino gamblers were visually overrepresented within potentially targeted advertising content compared to males [ 8 ]. Female-orientated content was also observed in relation to the marketing of UK-based bingo websites [ 39 ]. Such websites included the use of ‘feminine’ colour schemes alongside light-hearted, fun and reassuring content that aimed to create a sense of belonging for new customers. Bingo was also predominantly portrayed as a benign activity to engage with regularly [ 39 ].

Contrastingly, numerous studies of sports betting advertising highlighted the male-orientated focus of incorporated content [ 40 – 42 ]. For example, Australian operators positively framed sports betting via themes such as thrill, peer bonding, power/control and sports-fan rituals [ 40 ]. This trend was also observable across other jurisdictions such as the UK and Spain in which televised football betting advertisements were male-dominated and visually combined gambling participation, drinking alcohol and emotionally charged situations such as celebrating a goal and peer bonding [ 41 , 43 ]. A further study conducted by Lopez-Gonzales et al. [ 42 ] re-examined these British and Spanish advertisements in terms of their conceptual metaphors and concluded that operators aimed to align love for a team with betting on that team and portrayed sports betting as a rational market in which the smart succeed. In addition, the positive framing of sports betting within UK advertisements may also be facilitated via the use of a dual-persuasive strategy that aims to reduce perceived risks whilst increasing perceptions of increased control. This persuasive content strategy was highlighted in one study that distinguished the incorporation of positive themes that oriented around ‘free’ money and fun whilst emphasising the advantageous effects of knowledge and sports-related data analysis within a masculine context [ 44 ].

From a broader perspective, the current review revealed a less overt positive framing of gambling by operators who utilised social media to build brand awareness amongst audiences and form positive relationships with customers. Studies conducted in both the UK and Australia highlighted the online posting of less commercial content by operators. This included posting related news and upcoming events as a means of positively normalising gambling within a broader social context [ 45 , 46 ]. In a qualitative interview study of Australian gambling industry employees, participants disclosed sharing stories of customer wins and posting interesting news content with the aim of targeting specific audiences; sometimes this audience included young adults, while on other occasions content was directed towards higher profile social media users for the sake of brand exposure [ 47 ].

Odds-related content and promoting complex bets

Several studies highlighted the dissemination of specific odds or betting-related information and content by operators within the context of sports betting. One Australian study identified that the indirect or non-commercialised approach utilised on social media platforms used to build brand awareness was often interwoven with specific odds-related content with the aim of keeping customers informed [ 47 ]. Other studies focused upon the betting and odds-related content disseminated via televised sports betting advertisements. For example, in an investigation of UK and Spanish advertising depictions of betting behaviour, it was determined via qualitative content analysis that bettors were frequently shown to be partaking in ‘in-play’ betting via the use of smart-phones and laptops [ 43 ]. This emergent form of betting refers to the placement of wagers on an ongoing event that is yet to finish; bets can be modified by the user as the event progresses meaning they are often more complex and have longer odds compared to more conventional forms of sports betting [ 43 ].

The current review revealed a skewed representation towards such complex bets as well as other ‘exotic’, ‘special’ or high stakes wagers within UK televised football betting advertisements. Specifically, such advertisements were more likely to depict and promote these complex bets in comparison to more simple bets during matches throughout the English Premier League [ 4 ] and during the 2018 World Cup [ 48 , 49 ]. The authors argued that this was facilitated via a qualitative trend amongst the advertisements that is theoretically designed to nudge bettors through multiple channels towards more impulsive and high-risk bets with larger potential payoffs [ 4 , 48 , 49 ]. This was also observable amongst conventional gambling advertisements within UK bookmaker shop windows during the 2014 World Cup [ 50 ]. It was found that odds-related content associated with complex bets was advertised almost exclusively via this method [ 50 ]. No included studies focused on comparing the depiction of complex vs simple sporting bets within other jurisdictions such as Australia or Sweden. It appears this topic has most thoroughly been investigated in the UK thus far. However, it is acknowledged that studies published in languages other than English may have also examined this topic but were subsequently excluded from the current review during the literature search.

Financially incentivising content

The current review identified a prominent theme of operators incorporating financial incentives into advertising content that took a wide range of forms. Within the included studies financial incentives were characterised by their intended purpose of encouraging gambling amongst consumers by providing them with inducements, offers and promotional deals such as ‘free bets’, bonuses and matched deposits [ 51 ]. In comparison to traditional media sources such as television, financial incentives are often disseminated digitally via mobile and social media sources that do not typically adhere to established advertising restrictions [ 51 ]. Although financial incentives are distributed within the context of various gambling types [ 8 , 39 ], they are most commonly associated with sports betting [ 45 , 51 – 53 ].

The extensive variability of gambling-related inducements and offers was highlighted within an Australian study that identified 15 different types of incentivising content [ 51 ]. This included; sign-up offers, refer a friend offers, happy hours, refund (stake back) offers, odds-bonuses and winnings paid back to the consumer despite an unsuccessful bet [ 51 ]. Such content was often disseminated by Australian sports betting operators via social media [ 38 , 46 ], direct emails, and texts [ 53 ]. Similarly, UK gambling operators often included inducement and offer-related content within their Twitter posting [ 45 , 52 ] as well as televised gambling advertisements within a sports betting context [ 44 ]. To a lesser degree, televised Swedish casino advertising [ 8 ] and UK-based bingo websites [ 39 ] were also identified for their use of financially incentivising content aimed at prompting customer engagement.

‘Responsible gambling’ and harm-reductive content

Several studies identified a significant lack of ‘responsible gambling’ (RG) and harm-reduction messaging within the advertisements disseminated by gambling operators across a range of formats. This type of messaging typically takes the form of age restriction information, terms and conditions (T&Cs), signposting towards support services and warnings of the negative consequences of gambling [ 54 ]. The included studies focused upon such content assimilated into or presented alongside the marketing or promotion of gambling brands, products and offers. Investigations of standalone harm-reduction or RG campaigns that fall outside of the commercial advertising efforts of the industry were not included.

In a study of Australian social casino advertisements distributed via social media, it was determined that little provision was given to such messaging in which nearly 90% of all analysed adverts ( n  = 115) contained no content aimed to protect consumers from gambling-related harm [ 36 ]. Similarly, this lack of harm-reductive messaging was also observed amongst other social media advertisements for Australian casino venues, lottery venues, electric gaming machine (EGM) venues and sports betting operators [ 46 ]. Individual inducements and offers on Australian wagering websites were also highlighted for their significant lack of RG messaging alongside lengthy T&Cs that often incorporated complicated legalistic language [ 51 ]. Although 95% of the analysed websites ( n  = 223) displayed some form of RG message on the home page, they were characterised by their lack of prominence and visibility [ 51 ].

UK-based studies of gambling advertising produced comparable findings in which Twitter posts from operators and affiliates (third parties) contained very few RG and harm-reduction messages [ 45 , 52 ]. In relation to UK televised sporting events, one study highlighted that only 1% of visual and verbal promotional gambling advertising references within boxing and 3% in football contained age restriction or harm-reduction messaging [ 55 ]. Correspondingly, a comprehensive analysis of printed, radio, internet and televised gambling advertising in the UK ( n  = 300) found that one in seven adverts did not feature age restriction or harm reduction messages whilst one in ten did not contain T&Cs [ 54 ]. Within adverts that did contain this content, such messages and information were characterised by very poor visibility and were unlikely to be displayed within the main frame of the advert. The majority of harm-reduction messages within the analysed advertisements failed to explicitly mention gambling-related harm [ 54 ].

Delivery and placement

The emergent delivery and placement of gambling advertising was outlined within 15 studies. Two sub-themes emerged that included: 1) The expansive placement of gambling advertising in and around sports; 2) Disseminating promotional gambling content via social media platforms.

The expansive placement of gambling advertising in and around sports

The reviewed studies primarily focused upon the more emergent developments between gambling advertising and televised sports over the past 5 years [ 4 , 48 – 50 , 55 ]. Only one study retrospectively assessed the prevalence of gambling within sports over the previous two decades. This was conducted via an investigation that tracked the frequency of gambling-related shirt sponsorship within English and Scottish Premier League football matches between 1992 and 2018 [ 56 ]. The authors concluded that over the measured period, the gambling industry had significantly increased the frequency of gambling-related shirt sponsorship; especially within the English Premier League. The beginning of this rapid increase coincided with the introduction of the Gambling Act of 2005 in which UK gambling rules and regulations were liberalised [ 56 ].

The prominence of gambling advertising broadcasted around UK televised football was also highlighted in other studies that investigated the presence of commercial-break gambling advertisements that aired during 2016 Premier League matches and the 2018 World Cup [ 4 , 48 , 49 ]. During the 2018 World Cup, 69 televised ‘live odds’ advertisements were shown across 32 matches by five bookmakers on British television [ 49 ]. In comparison, 63 instances of ‘live odds’ betting were depicted within televised gambling advertisements across 2 months (28 matches) of 2016 Premier League football matches [ 4 ]. It should be noted that these analyses focused specifically upon ‘live odds’ advertisements and did not include the other forms of televised football betting advertisements that also aired during this period [ 4 , 49 ].

Due to such high levels of commercial-break advertising, UK gambling operators agreed to a voluntary ‘whistle-to-whistle’ ban on such promotions before 21:00 in 2019 [ 55 ]. However, in an investigation of embedded (within play) gambling advertising that falls outside of the ‘whistle-to-whistle’ criteria, significant numbers of visual and verbal promotional gambling references were found in televised football and boxing [ 55 ]. A total of 358 promotional gambling references were recorded over one boxing match with an average of 4.70 references per broadcast minute; 2595 promotional gambling references were recorded over five football matches with an average of 2.75 references per broadcast minute. In boxing, gambling-references were most frequently displayed within the ring, whilst in football they were most frequently displayed around the pitch [ 55 ].

Disseminating promotional gambling content via social media platforms

In congruence with the increasing prevalence and evolution of social media, numerous studies have highlighted the various delivery and placement methods employed via digital platforms to increase the exposure of gambling advertisements amongst online audiences [ 34 , 36 , 38 , 45 – 47 , 52 ]. Traditional media sources such as television and printed media are still being utilised by the gambling industry to promote products [ 8 , 50 , 54 ]. However, the global reach of social media platforms may provide operators the opportunity to significantly increase brand awareness, attract new customers and provide efficient customer relationship management [ 45 ].

The platforms used by operators and affiliates to post gambling advertising and promotions included Facebook [ 36 , 38 , 46 , 47 ], YouTube [ 38 ] and most notably Twitter [ 34 , 38 , 45 – 47 , 52 ]. An Australian interview study of gambling industry employees found that these social media platforms were utilised for specific purposes; Facebook was used primarily for providing rapid feedback to customer queries whilst Twitter was predominantly used for broadcasting gambling-related news and information [ 47 ]. Interviewees also stated that it was common practice to pay for targeted advertising space on social media rather than utilising the broader approach of blanket advertising [ 47 ].

It has been previously noted that sports betting operators and affiliates maintain a prominent online social media presence for promotional and marketing purposes [ 46 ]. Three studies in the current review focused specifically upon the marketing activity and delivery methods of gambling operators and affiliates on Twitter [ 34 , 45 , 52 ]. The authors highlighted the potentially high volume of promotional tweets that were posted on a daily basis. In relation to large gambling operators, two studies concluded daily tweeting frequencies ranging between 89 and 202 tweets [ 34 ] and 33–398 tweets [ 52 ]. Tweets were found to be distributed at peak times during the day and more often on specific days of the week; possibly in synchrony with particular sporting events [ 34 ]. Affiliates were shown to tweet more often with an average of 594 tweets per day [ 45 ]. Affiliate marketing involves promotion by third-parties who are financed by gambling operators to direct customers towards particular offers or gambling products. This growing technique is mostly utilised via social media in which seemingly independent ‘influencers’ or ‘tipsters’ provide betting suggestions and recommendations [ 45 ].

Structural features and mechanics

The structural features and mechanics that are incorporated into emergent gambling advertising were outlined in 11 studies. Structural features were characterised by the utilisation of design elements or properties that determine how the advertisements are engaged with by users. Mechanics were characterised by the rules, procedures and specifications associated with game types or particular bets. Two sub-themes emerged that included: 1) Utilising digitally interactive methods for marketing purposes; 2) Specific conditions and requirements of advertised bets.

Utilising digitally interactive features for marketing purposes

Emergent gambling advertisements have begun to utilise digital features that require user engagement in order to interact with the advertisement, respond to it or share it [ 34 , 36 , 38 , 45 , 47 , 48 , 52 , 53 ]. These methods are often facilitated by the functionalities provided by social media. For example, Facebook advertisements for social casino games often utilise the ‘activity’ button within their posts [ 36 ]. This interactive feature allows the user to directly download the social casino app or automatically opens the web-browser interface of the game [ 36 ]. A similar characteristic was also highlighted within the promotional tweets, direct emails and texts from UK and Australian gambling operators in which direct URL links to the associated betting websites were often embedded within the promotional messages sent to consumers [ 34 , 53 ].

Two Australian studies also distinguished gambling advertisements that encouraged user-interaction via social media [ 46 , 47 ]. Audiences were often prompted to use the ‘comment’, ‘like’ and ‘share’ functions in relation to operator posts for the sake of brand-exposure [ 46 , 47 ]. Another strategy of increasing brand-exposure involved the utilisation of specific Twitter hashtags that reference particular sporting events or promote certain bets [ 34 , 38 , 52 ]. By doing so, sports betting operators could embed their promotional tweets into popular or trending threads relating to upcoming sporting events that were otherwise non-gambling related [ 38 ].

Alongside brand-exposure, hashtag functionality was also offered to potential customers by UK gambling operators as a means of increasing user-engagement [ 48 ]. Users could take advantage of hashtags such as ‘#getaprice’ and ‘#yourodds’ that allow them to create their own bets by requesting odds for combined events (complex bets) of their choice. The gambling operator then replies back to the user with the odds for their requested bet [ 48 ]. This interchange was also commonly performed on a more personal level in which Twitter users could send public or direct messages to operators regarding their customer queries about specific bets, odds and other gambling-related information [ 34 , 45 , 52 ]. Less overt interactions were also observable via Twitter in which UK operators aimed to increase customer engagement by utilising the ability to embed online-polls into their tweets [ 45 , 52 ]. These polls often posed seemingly innocuous sports-related questions to users in which the promotional intent of the post is not made explicit [ 45 , 52 ]. Examples of such polls include ‘ Will Harry Maguire score against Manchester United?’ (posted by Bet365 in 2018: [ 52 ] and ‘ What’s been the best goal of the World Cup so far ?’ (posted by SkyBet in 2018: [ 45 ]. Although the use of digitally interactive features of marketing was evident across numerous gambling formats [ 36 , 47 ], the evidence suggests they were overwhelmingly utilised within a sports betting context. This is likely due to the incorporation of live (sports-related) information and high level of customisation observable within sports betting. Currently, such elements appear to drive operator use of interactive features and therefore prompt interactive engagement amongst audiences more than other forms of gambling.

Conditions and requirements of advertised bets and offers

The mechanics involved with advertised bets and offers were highlighted in two studies that focused upon sports betting in both the UK [ 49 ] and Australia [ 51 ]. It was determined that many advertised sports betting incentives and inducements had specific conditions, stipulations and play-through requirements that restrict when tangible winnings can be withdrawn from a betting account. These conditions were highlighted for their abstruse and complex nature [ 51 ]. For example, a particular sign-up incentive highlighted by Hing et al. [ 51 ] offered bettors a 100% matched bonus up to $200 on the condition that they deposited $20 upon opening a new betting account. The conditions also stipulated that bettors needed to stake the deposit amount combined with the amount equivalent to the bonus bet at odds of 1.5 or greater. Bettors were required to do this three times over 3 months. As indicated by Hing et al. [ 51 ], “ These play-through requirements meant that it would cost bettors $1000 of their own money for a chance to win from a $200 bonus bet ” (p. 11). Similarly, ‘live-odds’ advertisements disseminated by UK bookmakers have also been shown to possess specific conditions [ 49 ]. During the 2018 football World Cup many ‘live-odds’ bets were advertised that were limited in terms of both time and quantity. Furthermore, bets were sometimes shown to be ‘improving’ in odds. The authors suggested that these mechanics may have been strategically designed to make ‘live-odds’ bets appear more urgent than necessary [ 49 ].

This rapid review aimed to contribute to the international literature by improving understanding of emergent gambling advertising content, delivery methods and structural features. The evidence suggests that overall, gambling advertising has increased in both complexity and interactivity. In relation to content, previous reviews have highlighted advertising that positively frames or glamorises gambling in a broad sense [ 57 , 58 ]. However, the current review suggests that this positively framed content has evolved and diversified beyond general glamorisation. This development is especially prominent within male-orientated sports betting advertisements that align gambling with emotionally charged situations, team loyalty and peer bonding [ 40 , 42 ]. The evidence suggests there may also be an additional form of positive framing within this content that represents themes of increased control whilst underrepresenting themes of risk via a dual persuasive strategy [ 44 ]. Positively framed advertising content may also be orientated towards young adults [ 36 ], parents [ 35 ] and women [ 39 ]; although further research is warranted with regards to these groups.

The pattern of results also points towards the depiction and promotion of complex, in-play and exotic bets compared to simple bets within the content of UK football betting advertisements. There may be an economic underpinning to this marketing technique as complex bets are subject to longer odds, equating to potentially higher profit margins for the gambling industry [ 49 ]. In addition, such bets may facilitate the emergent transformation of sports betting into an accelerated, continuous and more impulse-driven form of gambling [ 49 , 59 ]. The current review also suggests that the dissemination of incentivising gambling content such as inducements and offers continue to remain prominent methods of encouraging potential customer engagement. These incentives now take many forms [ 51 ], are increasingly complicated, and are pervasively advertised [ 44 , 52 ]. Contrastingly, much less provision is given to content that contains RG or harm-reductive messaging within gambling advertisements. The included studies indicated that such content is inconsistent, characterised by low visibility and sometimes completely absent [ 46 , 54 ]. In their current form, such messages have been highlighted for their likely inadequacy in reducing gambling-related harm. For example, a recent eye-tracking study of bettors and non-bettors demonstrated that very few visual fixations are placed on these messages in comparison to other wagering information displayed within sports betting advertisements [ 60 ]. Moreover, when specific RG messages are in fact actively perceived by bettors, the messages may fail in terms of their supposed purpose. An example of such message includes the popular UK RG slogan ‘when the fun stops, stop!”. This specific message was identified in approximately two-fifths of the advertising sample utilised by Critchlow et al. [ 54 ]. A recent study of 3000 gamblers, indicated that this particular message either showed no beneficial effect of curtailing gambling behaviour or produced a backfire effect that influenced increased betting participation [ 61 ].

Within UK sports in particular, the placement and delivery of gambling advertising has intensified over the previous 15 years. Sports betting promotions now extend beyond conventional methods of commercial break advertising and into the area of play [ 56 ]. Consequently, shirt sponsorship [ 56 ], verbal references made by commentators and embedded (ring/pitch side) advertisements [ 55 ] are now saturated with gambling-related stimuli. This is likely due to the unique and liberal nature of the 2005 UK Gambling Act. Although this legislation is set for review [ 62 ], it is unlikely that gambling-related sponsorship will be completely prohibited within UK sports. However, there is a political and academic consensus that the UK should follow nations like Spain in which gambling sponsorship within football has been prohibited by law [ 63 ]. Future research should seek to investigate the emergent placement of gambling advertising within sports across jurisdictions other than the UK that are set to liberalise sports betting such as North America. In the context of the UK, further research is warranted to investigate the online areas into which gambling advertising may be diverted in response to increasingly restrictive and more effective legislation [ 55 , 64 ]. This transition has already commenced to a certain extent, as evidenced by the increasing presence of gambling advertising across social media platforms [ 46 , 52 ]. The regulation of advertising across social media is likely to prove difficult given the direct and indirect promotion of gambling within these online spaces. For example, the findings of the current review indicate an emerging trend in which operators utilise seemingly innocuous content to build brand awareness [ 46 ] and finance affiliate promotion to implicitly market gambling online [ 45 ]. The promotional intent of these methods is not often made explicit. Furthermore, affiliate marketing has been recently questioned in terms of its transparency, sincerity and true benefit to consumers [ 10 ]. Due to this increased use of third-parties, affiliate marketing may also operate as a buffer that shifts or obscures the social responsibility of the gambling industry [ 45 ].

From a structural perspective, conventional means of disseminating gambling advertising such as television, radio and billboards have necessarily adopted a linear approach in which advertising is a one-way process of stimuli exposure with minimal user-interaction. By comparison, the recent evidence indicates that emergent gambling advertisements have begun to utilise digitally interactive features that provide the opportunity for a more collaborative interchange between the operator and the public [ 34 , 45 , 53 ]. Therefore, the current review recommends the empirical study of the mechanisms and impacts associated with these emergent structural features as a future research priority. This includes promotional URL links sent directly to bettors, gambling-related ‘polls’ posted by operator social media accounts and gambling-related hashtags utilised by consumers.

In relation to the completeness and applicability of these findings, it appears the available evidence is sufficient but not comprehensive in addressing the present research aims. As seen within the sphere of tobacco and alcohol marketing, internal information concerning gambling industry marketing is not made readily available to the public and is therefore difficult to obtain [ 65 – 67 ]. There is also a corresponding paucity of qualitative interview studies that explore marketing techniques involving gambling industry employees [ 47 ]. This lack of internal information results in empirical studies primarily taking an interpretative approach with researchers investigating the nature of gambling advertising via content or sentiment analysis. Although these forms of analysis are legitimate methods of elucidating subjective themes and messages within media content, appropriate measures must be taken to ensure trustworthiness [ 68 ]. However, amongst such studies in the current review ( n  = 20), only 11 reported the use of numerous coders. Such methodological limitations reduce the reliability of the associated studies and impede the quality of the research area.

The included studies typically included large samples of televised gambling adverts that were representative of those aired to the public. Although the content of televised adverts may be targeted, they are not disseminated based on the personalised data of the audience, thus individuals who watch the same television broadcast will be presented with the same advertisement. In contrast, representative online advertisements may be more challenging to obtain and investigate due to the industry trend of moving away from the use of online blanket marketing and towards the utilisation of individually targeted advertisements that utilise the digitised personal data of the user [ 47 ]. Theoretically, individuals could visit the same web page but be presented with different gambling advertisements. Furthermore, although mentioned anecdotally throughout the associated literature, there is a noticeable lack of research that investigates unsolicited pop-up advertising disseminated online and within mobile apps. These advertisements may be difficult to empirically study due (in-part) to their unpredictable and context-specific nature. This review therefore proposes investigation into online gambling advertisements that use personalised data as an additional future research priority in congruence with this popular marketing strategy.

It also appears the gambling advertising sphere may evolve at a speed that the academic literature struggles to keep pace with. The current review indicates that the literature base surrounding the nature and characteristics of gambling advertising has slowly expanded between 2015 and 2020 but remains underdeveloped in terms of scope and methodological diversity. In contrast, much more research has been conducted in relation to the similar areas of tobacco, alcohol and fast-food marketing [ 69 – 71 ]. The majority of available evidence has been conducted in either the UK or Australia. Therefore, alongside the general paucity of existing research, even less information has been produced in relation to other jurisdictions in which gambling and associated advertising have also been liberalised. Without insight into the unique gambling advertising characteristics of jurisdictions other than the UK and Australia, the associated literature remains culturally homogenous. In addition, there is a corresponding paucity of cross-cultural studies that compare the characteristics of gambling marketing based on varying regulatory approaches between jurisdictions. The current review therefore recommends the growth of such studies within the future literature in congruence with the global expansion of the gambling sphere.

Limitations

The findings of the current review should be considered in light of some potential limitations. Firstly, only studies that were published in the English language were included. Gambling advertising is prevalent across numerous jurisdictions in which English is not the primary language such as Sweden, Spain and France. Therefore, insightful and pertinent studies may have been excluded during the search strategy. Secondly, due to the rapid review methodology utilised, limitations were placed upon the number of databases searched alongside the time dedicated to screening. For example, although the MMAT is a widely used and reputable quality assessment tool [ 33 ], it is acknowledged that more in-depth yet time consuming tools are available. Despite these potential limitations, numerous coders were involved in the screening and quality assessment process in order to reinforce the rigor of the current methodology. Furthermore, the protocol for the current review was registered online alongside the inclusion of a search strategy report (Additional File 1 ) to increase transparency and trustworthiness.

There is limited research that focuses upon the content, delivery and structural features of emerging gambling advertising. The associated literature base between 2015 and 2020 has slowly expanded but is lacking in volume and diversity. This may be problematic given the findings here suggesting that as digital communication and the liberalisation of gambling advance, so do the intensity and complexity of gambling advertising. Furthermore, the online evolution of gambling advertising has resulted in more interactive adverts in which the promotional intent is less conspicuous than more conventional marketing strategies. There are numerous barriers that hinder empirical investigation into these topics. A deeper understanding and further research into gambling advertising characteristics are therefore warranted in order to effectively minimise potential harm, appropriately regulate gambling advertising and encourage more ethical marketing.

Acknowledgements

Not applicable.

Abbreviations

Authors’ contributions.

J.T., G.R.D. and B.J. were involved in all aspects of this work including design, literature search, screening, analysis and manuscript preparation. MOH., N.D. and J.G. were involved in the screening, analysis and interpretation of this work alongside the critical revision of the manuscript for publication. The author(s) read and approved the final manuscript.

This review was conducted as part of JT’s PhD studies. The PhD is funded by GambleAware. GambleAware had no involvement in the design, procedure, interpretation or write-up of the current review. All other co-authors received no funding for their role in this research.

Availability of data and materials

Declarations.

Not applicable .

The authors declare that they have no competing interests.

Publisher’s Note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Case study: how to advertise online Gambling on Push ads

• Joey Babineau

Joey Babineau will show his Gambling case study.

He’ll show how to advertise online gambling with Push ads. Here you’ll find how to set up and optimize a gambling ad campaign.

Creatives and landing page examples are also included!

Push ads and Gambling offers are a brilliant couple to make a profit. Of course, if you know how to do it right.

Affiliate marketing expert Joey Babineau will show how to advertise online gambling with Push ads. Here you’ll find how to set up and optimize Gambling ad campaigns . Also, we’ll show creatives, landing page examples, and some useful tricks. 

The casino offers work extremely well on push ads. It is a great traffic source for a CPA affiliate marketer as we can start running ads pretty much instantly and getting super chip penny clicks. I chose a lead generation Casino offer for Canada (CPL) with a $4 payout. For 1 day of testing RichAds push traffic, I’ve spent $22 and got 521 clicks. I’ve got three conversions on the first day of running. Joey Babineau

Some tips for launching

🎯 Don’t use direct links as you don’t know whether someone clicks throw to the next phase or not. Also, you can’t predict whether you have quality traffic or people drop off. Joey recommends using landing pages when advertising online gambling.

🎯 Start with at least five creatives to find the best converting one. Below you’ll see that only 1 creative from 5 brings all conversions.

🎯 People usually play in the evening and on the weekends. But set up the schedule all day long for tests and then optimize results.

What is RichAds? 🔝 Push and pop ads, 🔼 Direct click ads (domain redirect), 🔝 CPM for domain ads starts from $ 1.5 , ⏫ CPC for push ads starts from $ 0.005 , 🔼 CPM for pops — from $0 . 5 in Tier 3, $1 in Tier 1, ⏫ large volumes of available traffic in more than 200 goes.

How to set up Gambling on push ads

Setting up details: CPC: $0.045 Mobile devices only Impressions per user: 2 per day Clicks per user: 2 per day Creatives: 5 Landing pages: 3 Budget type: Even Push ads network: RichAds

Setting up an advertising campaign at RichAds is a simple thing. You need to choose an ad format or import a ready-made campaign from the other ad networks.

I am creating a new campaign.

1. Add the creatives for Gambling offer

Setting up a push campaign starts with creatives. I have prepared 5 different options. You can start with 7 or even 10, but I decided to start my test with 5. This is the best option to try.

You can use the spy tool ( Adplexity , for example) to see which ads show good results and how they look like. But never steal the creatives — it lowers CTR. Just make them look like the best examples you’ve seen.

My creatives examples for Gambling offer

Best Gambling creatives examples in 2024

My landing page example.

When you advertise online gambling with push ads for mobile devices, the main trick with a landing page is that you try to engage the user quickly.

Most of the users will scroll through their cell phones. So, it would help if you had something that quickly catches their attention.

It can be a really aggressive headline on push or smth that looks like loading or a game at the landing page where users can quickly click the button and start engaging with your site.

Setting up postback

A campaign without a postback is a waste of money. I set up the whole process in a couple of minutes. RichAds is already added to my tracker as a traffic source, affiliate network, too, so everything goes fast.

It’s more convenient for me when all the data is in the tracker, and I don’t need to switch between tabs.

You don’t know how to set up a postback? Our step-by-step guide is here . You can also see step-by-step setup using integrated trackers here .

Setting up the device, clicks, and impressions cap

Everything is simple here. As I have already mentioned, we are launching Gambling in Canada. I decided to focus on mobile traffic.

Please pay attention to my impressions and clicks limits. In both cases, I put 2 a day. As practice shows, one-click for conversion is not enough for many users, so I put 2 to give them a chance.

Setting up CPC and daily budget

I set up CPC = $0.045 and daily budget (per day) = $25.

It is essential to mention that the budget should not be spent immediately, so I set up the EVEN option.

These parameters will allow us to show ads to users all day long, and then we can see when they are most active and narrow time targeting options.

We recommend setting the budget type to ASAP (as soon as possible). This allows you to capture traffic in all possible situations where your bid is winning. Also, set a daily budget around $100 for conducting more precise  A/B tests .

Setting up the browser language

Canada has 2 official languages: English and French. Language preferences will vary from province to province. I set my potential customers’ browser languages to English because I have creatives and landing pages on it.

Please note that when choosing a language, the system shows how many such users are in the country – 63.45%.

Setting up the traffic sources

The main advice is to contact your manager for the list of successful sub-lists for your vertical and country to start. It’s an essential point, especially if your budget is limited.

If you don’t have a personal manager start to test from Premium sources: this the best ad network’s traffic, and if you won’t get results on it, cancel this offer.

RichAds managers will always advise and help in setting up the ad:

• will provide a successful geo or build a chain of several geos to start with,
• they will give advice on creatives or do them for you,
• will help with setting up and optimizing the company,
• will provide whitelists from the start,
• will help you choose a profitable vertical and ligaments,
• will discuss the specifics of running your campaign.

This is all for a start! Save the campaign and wait for the first results.

The optimization process of Gambling offer on push ads

Joey starts to optimize the gambling campaign after 1 day of running. He got three conversions per 521 clicks and spent $22.

If you see the conversions on day 1, your start is great, and you can optimize anything!

Analyze which creatives work better

The test shows that only one creative from five brings all three conversions! 

If you start with one creative and it won’t work, you’ll never know that the problem is in the bad creative or landing page. Learn more about the five stages of the offers’ A/B test here and tips on creatives’ A/B test here .

Check which subscribers lists show good results

After the creatives, look at the data about sub-lists in your tracker and turn off non-converting ones. 

For example, we have one sub-list with 63 views and no clicks through, so we turn it off.

Joey’s strategy is the following: if he sees that some of the sub-lists have enough views and no clicks through, he understands that the placement is weak. 

After we got some more results, we’ll look through more detailed statistics on publisher ID and site ID. But the first day of running is too early for these steps.

Set up Automated rules

RichAds has valuable free tools. Automated rules help to create blacklists automatically. It would be foolish not to use it instead of doing this work manually.

My rule: add to the blacklist all publishers with a CPA of more than $3 and no conversions.

Check which OS and browser work better

Statistics show that Android and Linux bring conversions. Chrome and Samsung rule too.

But it’s too early to switch off some of the OS or browser. It’s better to get more data before switching it off.

Watch the video with the full optimization process from Joey Babineau here .

Optimization is a never-ending story, but now you know what to look at. Remember that for advertising online gambling on push ads it’s very important to change creatives in time to avoid their burnout.

Let your data drive you to success!

Find high-quality push and pops traffic for your gambling offers in RichAds .

Maximizing revenue through an effective push notification strategy with RichAds

Most popular

• Aksana Shakal

In-page Push Notifications: How to Use Them to Reach iOS Devices

• advertising
• In-page push
• lead generation

• Nazar Volskov

Kaminari Click: review on anti fraud service

• affiliate marketing tools

Push Ads in 2024: Complete Advertiser’s Guide (updated)

• push-notifications

• Victoria Hubkina

How to make a profit from direct click traffic in 2024?

• Direct click
• Domain Redirect Traffic
• Parked domain traffic

• Olga Dashuk

Where to find push traffic of the highest quality? Use Premium sublists from RichAds

• affiliate marketing
• RichAds features

14 best tracking solutions for affiliate marketing in 2024

• digital marketing
• optimization

• RichAds Team

iOS Calendar Push Traffic. The Ultimate Guide in 2023

• calendar push

Subscribe to our blog

• Sweepstakes

SYSTEMATIC REVIEW article

Gambling marketing strategies and the internet: what do we know a systematic review.

• 1 EA 7479 SPURBO, University Bretagne Occidentale, Brest, France
• 2 UMR SPHERE 1246, University Nantes/Tours, Nantes, France
• 3 HUGOPSY Network, Rennes, France
• 4 Addictive Disorders Center, Brest, France
• 5 EHESP, School of Public Health, CREM UMR CNRS 6211, Rennes, France

Background: The gambling industry has developed many types of gambling on Internet in recent years. Gambling is a social activity for a majority of the world population, but problem gambling (PG) can emerge. The trajectories of gamblers from initiation to PG development are influenced by many variables, including individual and environmental variables and also variables linked to the gambling characteristics. Marketing has been reported to influence gamblers' perceptions and behaviors, but this is not as clear for digital marketing. Digital gambling marketing is broad, ranging from the marketing of gambling websites to communication and advertising on the social media and networks. The objective of this article was to fill this gap by conducting a systematic literature review in order to answer the following questions: (1) What are the strategies of digital gambling marketing? (2) What is the effect of this exposure on gambling representations, intentions and practices?

Method: A systematic review was conducted following the PRISMA guidelines on Pubmed database (Medline) from February 2020 to March 2020 and Scopus. Existing papers published between January 2000 and February 2020 were identified by searching with this algorithm: (((“internet”[MeSH Major Topic] OR (communications[All Fields] AND media[All Fields])) OR (“social media”[MeSH Terms] OR (“social”[All Fields] AND “media”[All Fields]) OR “social media”[All Fields])) AND “gambling”[MeSH Major Topic]) AND (“marketing”[MeSH Terms] OR “marketing”[All Fields]), in title, keywords or abstract.

Results: Ninety-one candidate studies were selected, 21 studies were selected for the systematic review. Sport appeared as a specific target of online gambling marketing. A growing range of platforms for online sport betting and the development of strategies on the social media were identified. Regarding content, a systematic association between sport and gambling was highlighted. Vulnerable populations, such as young people, appeared to be at high risk of exposure to gambling marketing.

Conclusion: Little data is available on the strategies of digital gambling marketing or on exposure to it. Sport could be the first target for future research to understand how the industry is targeting specific populations, and what influence these strategies could have on PG development.

Introduction

Internet has become a part of our lives and is both a medium for providing a wealth of information and an important tool for connecting with others around the globe ( 1 ). In recent years, the gambling industry has developed many types of gambling on different media, especially on the Internet. This expansion of legalized gambling has been identified as a public health concern ( 2 – 4 ). Gambling is a widespread social activity worldwide and nearly all national surveys conclude that there are more gamblers than non-gamblers ( 5 ). For example, 74% of the French population reported having gambled in their lifetime ( 6 ). In a majority of cases, gambling remains social gambling, but problem gambling (PG) can emerge ( 5 ). PG is defined as a persistent, maladaptive pattern of gambling resulting in clinically significant impairment or distress ( 7 ). Around the world, lifetime prevalence of PG ranges from 0.7 to 6.5% ( 5 ), and damage is severe: professional and financial ( 8 ), psychological, with an increased suicide risk ( 9 ), familial ( 5 ) etc. The trajectories of gamblers from initiation to PG development are influenced by many variables, including individual and environmental variables and also variables linked to the gambling characteristics ( 10 , 11 ). Participation in gambling is increasing with the growing availability of gambling, advertising, marketing, and gambling deregulation ( 12 , 13 ).

The gambling industry is one of the pioneers in internet technology development. It has designed gambling experiences to stimulate the human senses, by creatively integrating audio-visual technology, such as touch screens, surround sound, augmented reality, haptic actuators etc. ( 14 ). This strategy, based on experiential marketing, is very effective in influencing consumers' behavior, satisfaction, and loyalty ( 15 ). Through the creative use of touch, hearing and sight, the digital world has innovated in many ways of controlling and capturing human emotions ( 16 ). These evolutions in gambling types and the media used with the development of digital tools has enabled the gambling industry to expand its customer base ( 17 ). The legal status of online sports betting has been progressively changed and legalized in Europe since the mid-2000s, leading to a normalization of the practice. Consequently, the number of betting platforms legally available to consumers has increased. This has led to competition between companies to position themselves and attract customers to a relatively new market ( 18 ). Strategies developed by gambling operators on the internet can be included in the larger concept of the strategies of gambling marketing, defined as a management process from concept to customer.

Several studies have highlighted the links between the availability and proximity of gambling opportunities and excessive gambling practices ( 19 – 23 ). The causal mechanisms of the influence of advertising on gambling behavior are unknown despite a growing body of scientific evidence ( 24 ). Binde in 2014 in a critical review concluded that despite the lack of evidence, it was likely that gambling advertising had impact on gambling behaviors ( 25 ). Moreover in correlational studies, problem gamblers typically reported greater exposure to gambling advertising ( 26 ). Problem gamblers are a specific target for the gambling industry, in 2007, in Canada, 17.1% of online gamblers were considered as problem gamblers, and the money they spent amounted to 41% of the money spent online in the country ( 27 ). Gambling advertisements have been reported to have a greater impact on problem gamblers ( 25 , 28 , 29 ). Russel et al. found that in a large population of gamblers, 20% of those who reported a negative influence of repeated gambling advertisements were at risk or problem gamblers ( 30 ).

The recent prolific development in online gambling has been accompanied by growing concern for its potential harm ( 31 ). Regular and problem gamblers could be particularly concerned by the impact of digital gambling marketing. Online gamblers are defined as more at risk for problem gambling. Some studies have reported that online poker gamblers were two or three times more at risk of being problem gamblers than those gambling offline ( 27 ). In another study, Internet gamblers were significantly more likely to increase their gambling in response to online gambling promotions than non-interactive gamblers ( 26 ).

However, if advertising and traditional marketing have been reported to influence gamblers perceptions and behaviors, things are not as clear for digital marketing. Digital gambling marketing is broad, ranging from the marketing of online gambling websites to communication and advertising on the social media and networks. Social networks are considered to amount to a set of applications with various operating modes and uses: general networking (Facebook, MySpace), micro-blogging (Twitter), photo sharing, or exchange of ephemeral content (Instagram, Snapchat, etc.). These companies broadcast messages directly by insertion of classic advertisements into Internet users' news feeds, into stories, in the animation of official pages via community managers (Facebook, Instagram), and in the creation of cultural, sporting or festive events associated with the brand.

Analyzing the impact of the digital gambling marketing is important because 51% of people worldwide are connected to Internet (2019), especially young people: more than 90% of the 12 to 24-year-olds connect to the Internet every day, and respectively 80 and 94% of 12–17 and 18 to 24-year-olds used the social networks in 2019 ( 32 ). It can be supposed that the digital development of gambling and gambling marketing strategies on the Internet could influence gambling behaviors Very few studies in the literature have focused on this topic. The objective of this article was to fill this gap by conducting a systematic literature review in order to answer the following questions: (1) What strategies can be identified in digital gambling marketing? (2) What is the effect of this exposure on gambling representations, intentions and practices?

Materials and Methods

Protocol, registration, and eligibility criteria.

The PRISMA statement for reporting systematic reviews was adopted. Inclusion criteria were coded by both authors (MGL, KGM), reaching an agreement regarding the coding process and were as follows: (a) inclusion of studies concerning gambling marketing strategies on the Internet, (b) inclusion of articles containing quantitative and/or qualitative data, (c) inclusion of articles published in a peer-reviewed journal and following IMRAD, (d) inclusion of articles available as a full text in English or French.

Information Sources and Search Strategy

From February 2020 to March 2020 existing papers published between January 2000 and February 2020 were identified by searching the academic databases Pubmed (medline), and Scopus. The two authors drew up a list of agreed English keywords for the systematic search: (((“internet”[MeSH Major Topic] OR (communications[All Fields] AND media[All Fields])) OR (“social media”[MeSH Terms] OR (“social”[All Fields] AND “media”[All Fields]) OR “social media”[All Fields])) AND “gambling”[MeSH Major Topic]) AND (“marketing”[MeSH Terms] OR “marketing”[All Fields]), in title, keywords or abstract.

The inclusion and exclusion criteria are presented in Table 1 .

Table 1 . Inclusion and exclusion criteria.

Study Selection and Data Collection Process

The reviewers were the first two authors (MGL-KGM); they were researchers with previous experience in conducting literature reviews, and one of them had specific expertise in gambling disorders (MGL). The reviewers independently reviewed titles and abstracts, to ensure the reliability of the screening process. They then met to exchange their individual decisions and discussed their rationale for these decisions. Consensus was reached when the two reviewers agreed on article inclusion or exclusion. Full text articles for each included article were then collected, and screened by the two reviewers against the inclusion/exclusion criteria. The reviewers discussed any articles where a reviewer was unsure. Information extracted from the articles included: author names, year, and study location; journal, objective of the study, key results, key points of the discussion. Quality ratings were undertaken for all included peer-reviewed articles. We determined that all peer-reviewed research following IMRAD format was generally well-conducted and met the rating criteria. No studies were excluded for poor quality.

Ninety-one candidate studies were selected. After elimination of the duplicates ( n = 7), and after reading the title and summary, 50 papers were retained after elimination of 34 studies(not concerning gambling marketing: 29, not concerning digital marketing: 4, not following IMRAD: 1).

After perusal of the full texts, 21 studies were selected for the systematic review, after elimination of 29 studies (not concerning gambling marketing: 13, not concerning digital marketing: 11, not following IMRAD: 5).

The selection and inclusion processes are presented in a flow chart ( Figure 1 ).

Figure 1 . PRISMA flowchart.

All 21 studies that met the inclusion criteria were analyzed. Of the 21 studies included, two were conducted in Europe (Spain, UK and UK) and one in Canada, one in USA/Australia and 17 in Australia or New Zealand. Quantitative methods were used in seven studies, mixed methods in five studies, qualitative methods in four studies, and content analyses in four studies. A majority focused on sport betting marketing strategies online (12 studies), only one study focused on poker, one on online bingo, and six studies concerned all types of digital gambling marketing strategies. One study concerned the marketing of social casino gaming. We included this study, because although casino games are free games, they are similar to gambling games. Users play with free virtual credits and cannot win monetary prizes, so that to some extent social casino games and gambling industry products converge ( 33 ).

Three main themes were identified in the selected articles. The first is that sport is a huge target for digital gambling marketing. A multiplicity of online platforms for gambling marketing diffusion have been identified and a wide range of digital gambling marketing strategies on the social media concerning sport betting have been observed. In addition, another recurrent subtheme was the systematic association of sport and gambling, fostering a normalization of betting and of gambling. The second theme was that digital gambling marketing strategies are gendered. A majority targeted young men, more particularly for betting and poker, and bingo websites were defined as targeting women. The third theme identified was that digital gambling marketing strategies focused on vulnerable populations, including young people and problem gamblers or at risk gamblers. The main results of the selected studies are presented in Tables 2A – D (2a: Articles concerning gambling marketing and sports; 2b: Articles concerning specific profiles (according to gambling characteristics: type of game, number of accounts); 2c: Articles concerning the use of social media or websites tools; 2d: Articles concerning harm reduction or responsible gambling and online gambling marketing).

Table 2A . Articles concerning gambling marketing and sport.

Table 2B . Articles concerning specific profiles (according gambling characteristics: type of game, numbers of accounts).

Table 2C . Articles concerning the use of social media or websites tools.

Table 2D . Articles concerning harm reduction or responsible gambling and online gambling marketing.

This review included only 21 articles on the topic of the digital marketing of gambling. They were for a large majority conducted in Australia or New Zealand. This lack of data, more particularly for North America or Europe, is surprising, given the development of online gambling and online internet gambling marketing in the last 10 years. As an example, the total market value of the global mobile phone gambling industry increased 10-fold between 2006 and 2011 ($23 billion compared to $2 billion) ( 54 ) These developments, and the structural characteristics of Internet, combining easy and cost-effective access, has prompted the gambling industry to widely invest in emerging technological tools. The high level of exposure to positive gambling cues in society has led to the perception of gambling as an acceptable, credible and harmless leisure activity ( 55 ).

Sport: A Huge Target for Digital Gambling Marketing

In the literature on Internet marketing of gambling, the main emerging area concerned sports betting. The majority of selected articles ( 12 ) concerned gambling marketing in relation to sports.

A Multiplicity of Platforms and the Development of Strategies on the Social Media

The multiplicity of online platforms has enabled both the development and the repetition of positive messages promoting gambling practices and brand-names.

Gambling advertising has entered everyday life, and people can be exposed without having sought tony information on gambling. Gambling advertising and promotions can be found outside the traditional commercial-break advertising ( 43 ). Deans et al. showed that gambling marketing products had entered everyday community and media spaces. In their sample of young men, 50% reported having seen online betting marketing (pop-up banners) and 36% had seen it on the social media ( 36 ). In a qualitative study, Pitt et al. showed that parents and adolescents were conscious of the increasing development of marketing, more particularly for sports betting. Parents thought their adolescents were at risk because of the link between gambling marketing and accessibility via mobile technologies and websites ( 43 ). Browne et al. using an Ecological Momentary Assessment found that more than 8% of bettors remembered exposure to gambling advertisements on unrelated apps or websites. More than 11% reported social media posts concerning gambling and more than 10% reported direct messages. This last strategy is a specific concern: direct messaging via e-mails, texts, and phone calls from gambling operators is a problem. The majority of these direct messages promote specific gambling inducements, and bettors report that this type of marketing is intense and particularly influential on their betting, encouraging them to bet and to spend more on betting ( 44 ). Browne et al. also found that this type of advertising was associated with greater intention to bet, more betting, and betting more than intended for regular horse-race bettors ( 34 ).

The digital media have helped to broaden the scope of advertising messages, especially in sports betting. Gainsbury et al. showed that in a large sample of online gamblers, online gambling advertising influenced gamblers in their initial decision to choose an operator. They also reported that those more involved, with multiple online accounts, were more active bettors and were influenced by promotions ( 47 ). Browne et al. showed that exposure to gambling marketing increased the likelihood of betting, and increased spending on bets. They concluded in their study that gambling marketing negatively affected substantial numbers of bettors already at risk for, or currently experiencing, gambling problems ( 34 ). The promotion of gambling inducements increased impulsive in-play betting among problem gamblers and involved gamblers at higher risk of problem gambling. They were however less aware of online gambling promotions, compared to less involved gamblers ( 38 ).

Regarding the social media, the prevalence of users of the social media in the world is high, particularly in higher-income countries such as North America, where 56% of the population are active social network users, or in Western Europe, where 43% are concerned ( 50 ). The social media enable gambling operators to promote products and brand-names with fewer constraints than in traditional forms of media. Many social marketing campaigns aim to generate the equivalent of “word-of-mouth” ( 56 ). Social media marketing strategies have the potential to create a particular personal relationship between users and brand-names ( 57 ). Research on brand engagement on the social media has found that relationships between consumers and the brand-name, the product and companies all positively influenced trust and brand loyalty ( 58 ). An Australian study has shown that reputation is the most important factor in choosing an online gambling site ( 47 ). Even a limited use of social media by gambling operators could have a large impact in terms of promoting gambling products and causing harm. Through the social media, gambling marketing reinforces social norms and over-represents attitudes among fans, followers and their peers ( 50 ). The social media are used to portray a “brand personality,” and to foster enthusiasm in their communities ( 49 , 59 ). Interviews of gambling operators have suggested that the social media are perceived as useful tools to increase website traffic, to raise interest and awareness and ultimately to increase gambling sales ( 60 ). Gambling operators are established on the social networks, Facebook and Twitter, collecting an average of 62,084 likes and 30,594 followers across the UK's top 10 betting sites ( 61 ). A survey of Australian gamblers found 40% had seen gambling marketing on Facebook ( 28 ).

A Systematic Association of Sport and Gambling Fostering a Normalization

The extent of gambling advertising and penetration through the digital media and Internet is a contributory factor in strengthening the mental association between sport and gambling ( 62 , 63 ). The content of gambling advertising reinforces links between gamblers and sport: betting is rooted deep in the relationship between sport and fans ( 39 ). For example, the love metaphor is used in gambling advertising online, calling on both romantic love and friendship, and appealing to bettor loyalty. Gambling is depicted as a truly positive activity. On the social media, some posts portray gambling as glamorous, exciting and fun, others emphasize gambling winnings, and community benefits are also highlighted ( 35 , 50 ). The message conveyed through these positive contents is that gambling provides easy money, fun, enjoyment and an entertaining, easy, effort-free lifestyle ( 64 ). The sports betting industry uses numerous symbolic strategies to promote the social acceptance of sports betting, similar those to used in the promotion of other unhealthy products, such as alcohol or tobacco ( 35 ).

Gambling marketing influences gambling perceptions and interpretations of gambling and minimizes the risks. One of the main and longer-lasting effects of gambling advertising is the normalization of gambling ( 65 , 66 ). Normalization is a long-term process, including sub-processes of cultural and legal legitimization. Gambling marketing cues introduced into the community and daily life ( 36 ) normalize potentially risky products by portraying their use in different everyday situations. Gambling marketing attempts to elicit emotive responses, or to trigger memories ( 50 ). Some author have referred to “the sportification of gambling and the gamblification of sport” ( 67 ). This phenomenon is identified in different articles: Gainsbury et al. found that the aligning of gambling with sport was a frequent content, and Lopez-Gonzalez showed that engagement and loyalty is also used to enhance involvement in gambling ( 39 , 50 ). The risk underlined by authors regarding this association between betting and sport is that sport is represented as systematically associated with gambling, while gambling is represented as a sport ( 35 , 36 , 39 ). Online sport advertising uses the metaphor of betting as a sport, and the gambling companies are thus associated with the healthy attributes of sport ( 39 ). Moreover, if gambling is a sport, skills and training could help gamblers to improve their results, and these messages could reinforce cognitive distortions among gamblers, which is one well-known risk factor for problem gambling ( 68 , 69 ).

Sport is a very attractive venue for companies to reach people and promote products and brand-names ( 40 ). Sponsorship of peak sporting events by unhealthy food, beverage, alcohol, and gambling product companies is prevalent in Australia according to the results of Mc Niven et al. who reported that 14.6% of unhealthy sponsorships concerned gambling ( 40 ). Sport sponsorship is a marketing tool, more acceptable by the public because it is indirect and it builds public goodwill toward the company ( 70 ). It associates sponsored products with a healthy positive image, which is particularly important for products that can involve risks for health ( 70 ). A study conducted in 2006 by Maher showed that gambling was the first sponsorship product in the most popular sports for 5 to 17-year-olds in New Zealand ( 41 ). In 2015 Macniven showed that only 26.9% of national sport organization websites had solely healthy sponsorships, and that 14.6% of sponsorships of websites concerned gambling companies.

These strategies concerning sport and online gambling have been implicated in the general development of gambling. One study showed that gambling advertising was associated with the development of sports betting among people who did not previously gamble ( 71 ). In a recent study, Newall et al. in the UK analyzed “Live-odds” gambling adverts, during World Cup matches on TV. They showed that advertisements were skewed toward complex events, more difficult to predict, and that the content of advertisements made bets appear more urgent than necessary ( 72 ). With this development and potentially greater diversity in gambler populations, there is likely to be an extension to new population groups experiencing problem gambling, and greater concern for vulnerable populations.

A Gendered Marketing Strategy

Young men are defined as targets for betting and poker websites. Australian gambling operators interviewed by Gainsbury et al. reported that, on the social media, they targeted the population of young adult men ( 49 ). In an exploratory study of gambling operator contents, the same authors showed that gambling was naturally aligned with sport, to convey messages that gambling is a way to demonstrate team loyalty and masculinity ( 50 ). Deans et al. showed that young gamblers believed that young men were especially vulnerable to gambling harm, and that marketing amplified the risks associated with sports betting and played an important role in shaping the gambling identities of young men ( 36 ). In another study analyzing the content of sports betting advertisements, Deans et al. ( 35 ) showed that there was clear gender stereotyping in sports betting advertising. Men were mostly represented as central actors, women were sexually objectified, with advertisements portraying male dominance or power over women. Two key stereotypes of men in Australian gambling advertisements were noted: the first is the average “Australian male,” for whom sports gambling could represent an escape from the ordinary to become more attractive to women, to gain power and authority or to be able to afford a glamorous lifestyle. The second stereotype concerns bookmakers, portrayed as powerful players ( 35 ).

Regarding the online sports betting marketing, metaphors are used, and among four metaphors identified by Lopez-Gonzalez et al. the metaphor of “gambling as a market” and “gambling as natural” could also be compared to a gendered approach. These metaphors represent betting as an inevitable, innate behavior, akin to instincts or sexual relationships. Betting is defined as an inevitable process, escaping individual volition, as a survival process or as a struggle to survive ( 39 ). These gendered digital marketing strategies are particularly concerning, as young adult males are the socio-demographic group the most at risk for gambling problems ( 11 ). Hing et al. showed that impulse betting both before and after match commencement was more frequent among young men, who were clearly the target for sports betting advertising, including promotions for incentivized bets during play ( 38 ). Concerning poker websites, marketing strategies were also shown to be focused on men: Mc Mullan and Kervin analyzed online poker websites and found that adult-oriented imagery, such as young women in bikinis or adults depicted in sophisticated clothing and settings, were frequently used ( 51 ).

In contrast, one study conducted in the UK on bingo websites, showed that marketing strategies on these websites were congruent with the expectations of women who play bingo. The authors reported that bingo websites seemed to be designed largely to appeal to women, through the use of the colors pink and purple, images of hearts, cocktails, fashion, and glitter balls, offers for beauty products, and references to “mums.” The bingo sites had the effect of positioning gambling as a benign, child-like, homely, women-friendly, social activity ( 48 ).

Online Gambling Marketing and Vulnerable Targets

In a public health approach to prevention of gambling and in order to determine the potential impact of gambling marketing on vulnerable populations, a comparison can be made with alcohol. Babor et al. established that young people and heavy drinkers are vulnerable populations for exposure to alcohol marketing strategies ( 73 ). The same vulnerabilities can be presumed concerning gambling behaviors and gambling marketing methods. An early age of initiation is a high risk factor for the development of problem gambling later in life, and it is associated with greater severity of problem gambling ( 74 – 76 ). Despite the fact that regulations prohibit gambling by minors in many countries, for instance France or Spain, evidence exists that these populations gamble ( 11 , 77 ). Gambling advertisements and specific promotions also have a greater impact in encouraging gambling amongst problem gamblers than among non-problematic gamblers ( 78 ).

Younger Targets

The familiarity of minors with the Internet increases their likelihood of playing. For instance, 72% of adolescents use the Internet more than once a day in Australia ( 79 ). Pitt et al. showed that 8 to 16-year-olds were widely exposed to sports gambling marketing, for 46% through websites ( 42 ). In addition, online gambling is private and feasible anywhere, and online gambling websites offer prizes and a wide range of temporary promotions. Online gamblers report a positive playing experience and greater physical comfort than offline gamblers ( 80 ). In another study adolescents felt “encouraged to bet,” more particularly on mobile phone ( 43 ).

Major social media and online gaming companies have started making inroads into the gambling business. This “digital convergence” has created opportunities for the gambling industry to expand its customer base, particularly among young people ( 81 ). The evolution of technical aspects of betting, such as opening accounts and betting via mobile phones, are also perfectly modeled for young people ( 82 ). The proliferation of simulated forms of gambling not involving money on the social media is a gateway to encourage adolescents to progress to online gambling. Social gambling can also lead to a diversification of gambling offers for young people, with an easier, more attractive access to casinos. Abarbanel et al., using a content analysis of a sample of 115 social casino gaming advertisements, clearly showed that the images and messages were designed to target young populations, by including references to popular culture, cartoons, and sport, and deploying a glamorization and encouragement for gambling, including free play ( 46 ).

Despite this observation that young people are particularly prominent consumers on digital media platforms, very few studies have focused on this topic ( 45 , 83 ). There is still very limited information about the promotion of gambling on these media and on how it influences the exposure of young people to gambling advertising ( 45 , 83 ). Deans et al. interviewed a sample of young male gamblers, and the majority believed that young men were the key target for gambling companies ( 36 ).

However, digital communications are liable to enhance exposure to favorable presentations of online gambling. An analysis of poker websites showed that 28% of the images portrayed concerned people aged 25 or under, in attractive environments ( 51 ). Gambling marketing clearly influences gambling intentions. Derevensky et al. noted that 40% of the young people in their study stated that they had wanted to try gambling after seeing gambling advertisements ( 77 ). Thomas et al. found that 75% of a sample of 8 to 16-year-olds could recall the brand name of at least one sports betting company ( 84 ).

Many European countries have identified a large increase in gambling participation among underage young people. For example in the United Kingdom, 38% of the 16 to 24-year-olds gambled in 2016 compared to 5% the previous year ( 85 ). In other reports, ~60–80% of young people engaged in formal or informal gambling before the legal age ( 11 , 86 , 87 ). This population is at higher risk of losing control compared to older adults, and the prevalence of problem gambling is higher. In Finland a survey identified 4.9% of 12 to 15-year-olds as risk-prone gamblers ( 88 ); in Sweden one study found that the incidence of PG among 16 to 24-year-olds was more than double the proportion for adults aged 25–44 years ( 89 ). Links between the development of marketing strategies, more particularly online, and these gambling behaviors among young people need to be explored further. Gainsbury et al. for their part failed to show that content on social media directly appealed to young people. However, given the few restrictions on social media use, the inherent difficulties in monitoring and the widespread use of social media among young people, continuing research is needed to monitor the impact of gambling marketing via the social media on young people ( 50 ).

Problem Gamblers

Hing et al. in an online survey on a sample of 639 online sport bettors in Australia, showed that attitudes to particular aspects of sports betting advertising vary with PG severity. Online sports bettors with more severe PG symptoms had a more positive response to gambling sponsors: increased awareness of, attention to, and recall of the sponsor's name and their promotions (interest), a more favorable disposition toward the sponsor (favorability), and a greater likelihood of using the sponsor's products (use) ( 37 ). The frequency of gambling on the Internet and participation in online discussions on gaming tables at casinos were predictors of gambling severity in a study by Howe et al. ( 52 ). Moderate-risk gamblers were significantly more likely to report seeing gambling promotions on the social media, and nearly 30% of moderate-risk gamblers reported that social media promotions had increased their problems ( 29 ). Gambling advertising compromises gambling prevention campaigns aimed at reducing gambling and encouraging help-seeking. The positive messages on gambling conveyed through the social media are not counterbalanced by warning messages, as observed by Gainsbury et al.: only 11.2% of the operators had information on responsible gambling or problem gambling on the social media ( 50 ). Moderate and risk-prone gamblers are more attentive to responsible gambling messages ( 50 ). Thus, given the impact of social media marketing on vulnerable gamblers, the inclusion of responsible gambling messages on these platforms seems effective ( 50 ). In addition, social media marketing influences both infrequent and frequent gamblers, who may be unable to resist urges to gamble elicited by external cues found in advertising ( 90 ). Gainsbury et al., in a study including 2,799 gamblers, found that problem gamblers were significantly more likely than non-problem gamblers to be influenced by promotions and incentives, such as credits or bonuses provided by online gambling sites ( 78 ). However, many difficulties exist in the development of responsible gambling messages. Aspects that are critical to the effectiveness of these messages concern the type of content used, the way it is framed, whether it engages consumers in self-referential processing, the level of specificity and applicability for use in real-world settings, and the social norms deployed. Messages should be personalized to target specific population subgroups. Adequate understanding of the characteristics of these subgroups is important and could enhance the presentation of health information ( 91 ).

Implications: A Need for Regulations?

Over the last 2 decades there has been a significant shift toward more liberal gambling regulatory frameworks in many countries around the world. The availability and accessibility of gambling has risen in community settings. The Internet has evolved rapidly, leaving policy makers and regulators far behind the innovative commercial products and offers ( 92 ). More recently, the liberalization of gambling has led to a legalization of more pervasive forms of gambling, alongside the development of new technologies and higher-intensity products leading to a larger penetration of gambling products in the community ( 53 ).

Governments have been largely unwilling to enact a comprehensive public health approach to gambling as applied in other areas such as tobacco. Governmental regulation efforts remain focused on individual responsibility frameworks to minimize the harm associated with “problem gambling,” which place few constraints on commercial activities and enable continued increases in revenue for both industry and government. There is growing ethical tension for governments between the revenue obtained from gambling products, and the need to be responsible and design rules that are acceptable for the community and public health ( 93 ).

It is important that regulations should keep pace with the advances in technology to ensure that social media platforms fall under the same regulatory frameworks as traditional advertising channels ( 45 ). Indeed, existing regulations do not apply to gambling advertising on social media platforms. This includes promoted content on YouTube, Instagram or Snapchat, which are the three most widely used social media by young people ( 45 ). To protect consumers better, any restrictions should cover digital as well as traditional advertising, to prevent the migration of advertising to less restricted, online, social media, and mobile platforms, as has occurred with the introduction of earlier advertising restrictions ( 34 , 49 ). As online gambling companies should be responsible for the harm related to their activities, Yani-De-Soriano suggested that corporate social responsibility policies should be fully implemented, monitored and clearly reported; all forms of advertising should be reduced substantially, and unfair or misleading promotional techniques should be banned ( 94 ). Gainsbury et al. found that gambling operators reported being cautious toward the risk of problem gambling, but that social media operators thought they were not suited to discussing responsible gambling ( 49 ) and most operators do not incorporate responsible gambling into the content posted ( 50 ). In many countries and particularly in Australia, as identified in this literature review, regulations have predominantly focused on traditional media such as television, and there are no regulations to restrict gambling advertising on social media platforms. In the UK, there have been some attempts to enforce restrictions on gambling advertisements online, with the banishment from websites of gambling advertisements directed toward young people ( 95 ).

It has been shown in Australia that there were discrepancies between government regulations and public expectations. Government approaches were not in line with community attitudes and public expectations for mechanisms for protecting communities from potentially harmful products ( 53 ), even for young people ( 45 ). Abarbanel et al. in a sample of social casino gaming advertisements targeting young gamblers, showed that 90% did not refer to responsible gambling or the risk of problem gambling ( 46 ). Thomas et al. reported that young people thought that sport regulations should protect them better from exposure to gambling advertisements. Young people reported a need to remove gambling advertising from sport ( 45 ). Targeted problem gambling prevention could be developed, and Gainsbury et al. hypothesized that moderate-risk gamblers were an appropriate target audience for responsible gambling messages and were more receptive to the use of social media platforms ( 29 ). Community support for advertising restrictions is much stronger than for other harmful products (such as alcohol or tobacco) ( 53 ). In another study, more than 90% of the participants agreed or strongly agreed with a proposed ban on gambling advertising in Australia ( 53 ).

However, caution is necessary regarding regulations. First, statutory requirements for gambling companies could in fact enhance gambling sponsorship, as in Australia, where 5% of the profits of West Lottery are due to the Western Department of Sport and Recreation. This probably influences the presence of Lottery West on Western Australian websites, ensuring brand-name presence ( 40 ). Thus, in the case of regulations limiting “unhealthy” sponsorships, governments would also need to adopt alternative funding mechanisms for sponsoring popular sports ( 41 ).

Petticrew et al. showed that the gambling industry, like the tobacco, alcohol, or food industries, frequently uses the concept of complexity, in response to policy announcements and to new scientific evidence. “Complexity” is apparently used to distract the audience from the industry's contribution to the problem and to promote inaction or ineffective solutions ( 96 ). When there is significant support for the regulation of products and negative attitudes in the community toward industries such as gambling or alcohol and tobacco, those industries could develop new strategies or countermeasures. For instance they might frame themselves as “good corporate citizens” to avoid or minimize the impact of restrictions or regulations ( 53 ). Some governments and government agencies periodically attempt to counter pro-gambling messages, for instance the Victorian Responsible Gambling Foundation which promoted a social media campaign named “Love the game, not the odds.” However, it is hard for these transient social media campaigns to counteract the overwhelming pro-gambling messages ( 97 ). Media campaigns that emphasize the damage associated with gambling reduce gambling intentions, but pro-gambling media campaigns are much more effective in enhancing intentions to gamble ( 98 , 99 ).

It will be important for public health advocates and coalitions to consider and recognize these strategies and to develop adapted online gambling regulations ( 100 ).

Future Research Development

Gaps in the literature were identified here and could fuel future research. Beyond the evaluation of influence and content analysis, there is no data on the exposure to digital gambling marketing stimuli, in terms of modalities, frequency, time, or potential influence. Secondly in the case of digital alcohol marketing, participatory forms generated by users but driven by the industry's marketing have been described ( 101 ). These strategies mobilize intermediaries (influencers) who disseminate messages in favor of the industries within the framework of remunerated partnerships. In addition, industries also encourage Internet users themselves to interact with the official pages of their brands (follow, like, comment, identify a friend, share, re-tweet, etc.) via the humorous content of quizzes and riddles, or contests. There is little data on the influence of these strategies in the context of gambling. There is also little research on the impact of gambling advertising online, on inducements or on loyalty programs ( 102 ).

Finally, regarding social interactions and the diffusion of gambling behaviors, the social media afford new opportunities for intervention, such as online counseling or pop-ups that remind users of the time and money spent on gambling. Embedded messages in sports contents are more salient than frequency of exposure in predicting gambling problems amongst online sports bettors ( 37 ). This implies a need for social marketing and public education to counter promotional messages. They should aim to moderate positive sentiments toward gambling, brands and their promotion, since this is what that leads to excessive gambling. Social marketing is still a largely unexplored avenue for the prevention of gambling, and more particularly among young gamblers ( 103 ).

Strengths and Limitations

This study focused on gambling, a growing public health concern, for which a preventive, therapeutic approach is needed. Twenty articles were selected following PRISMA guidelines among 64 identified initially. The analysis of these articles enabled identification of themes and characteristics of digital gambling marketing. One limitation is the focus on only two databases (Pubmed and SCOPUS), which could limit the results. In addition, the results of this review are subject to two biases limiting the generalizability of the data. There is firstly a cultural bias, in that a majority of studies concerned Australia or New Zealand. There is also a selection bias since a majority of the studies selected focused on digital strategies in sports betting. We did not include studies concerning gambling marketing on traditional media (television, radio, press).

The literature is currently sparse regarding digital gambling marketing, despite its huge development in recent years. The main available data concerns the development of digital marketing and sports betting, and their vulnerable targets, especially young people. We have shown in this review that sport is a major target for marketing, and operators have developed gendered marketing strategies to reach and influence gamblers' behaviors. The multiplicity of forms that online gambling marketing and advertising adopt accentuates the need for research on content and exposure on digital platforms. This fast-evolving area of gambling has brought new challenges to communities, problem gambling treatment providers, and researchers in the field of addictive disorders. It also remains an issue for regulators and policy makers.

Data Availability Statement

The original contributions presented in the study are included in the article/supplementary materials, further inquiries can be directed to the corresponding author/s.

Author Contributions

MG-L and KG-M conducted the literature review and wrote the article. DLev, DLe, and J-YL contributed to the method and the drafting, and reviewed the article. All authors contributed to the article and approved the submitted version.

Conflict of Interest

The authors declare that the research was conducted in the absence of any commercial or financial relationships that could be construed as a potential conflict of interest.

Acknowledgments

We want to thank the primary care research support unit, GIRCI grand Ouest, UBO Brest.

1. Young KS, De Abreu CN. Internet Addiction: A Handbook and Guide to Evaluation and Treatment. Hoboken, NJ: John Wiley & Sons Inc. (2011).

Google Scholar

2. Shaffer HJ, Korn DA. Gambling and related mental disorders: a public health analysis. Annu Rev Public Health. (2002) 23:171–212. doi: 10.1146/annurev.publhealth.23.100901.140532

CrossRef Full Text | Google Scholar

3. Williams RJ, Volberg RA, Stevens RMG. The Population Prevalence of Problem Gambling: Methodological Influences, Standardized Rates, Jurisdictional Differences, and Worldwide Trends. Ontario Problem Gambling Research Centre and the Ontario Ministry of Health and Long term Care (2012). Available online at: http://hdl.handle.net/10133/3068

4. The Lancet. Problem gambling is a public health concern. Lancet . (2017) 390:913. doi: 10.1016/S0140-6736(17)32333-4

5. Calado F, Griffiths MD. Problem gambling worldwide: an update and systematic review of empirical research (2000-2015). J Behav Addict. (2016) 5:592–613. doi: 10.1556/2006.5.2016.073

PubMed Abstract | CrossRef Full Text | Google Scholar

6. Costes J-M, Kairouz S, Eroukmanoff V, Monson E. Gambling patterns and problems of gamblers on licensed and unlicensed sites in France. J Gambl Stud . (2015) 32:79–91. doi: 10.1007/s10899-015-9541-2

7. American Psychiatric Association. Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders. 5th ed. Washington, DC (2013). doi: 10.1176/appi.books.9780890425596

8. Brandt L, Fischer G. Adult ADHD is associated with gambling severity and psychiatric comorbidity among treatment-seeking problem gamblers. J Atten Disord. (2017) 2017:1087054717690232. doi: 10.1177/1087054717690232

9. Guillou-Landreat M, Guilleux A, Sauvaget A, Brisson L, Leboucher J, Remaud M, et al. Factors associated with suicidal risk among a French cohort of problem gamblers seeking treatment. Psychiatry Res . (2016) 240:11–8. doi: 10.1016/j.psychres.2016.04.008

10. Bruneau M, Grall-Bronnec M, Venisse JL, Romo L, Valleur M, Magalon D, et al. Gambling transitions among adult gamblers: a multi-state model using a Markovian approach applied to the JEU cohort. Addict Behav. (2016) 57:13–20. doi: 10.1016/j.addbeh.2016.01.010

11. Guillou landreat M, Chereau Boudet I, Perrot B, Romo L, Codina I, Magalon D, et al. Problem and non-problem gamblers: a cross-sectional clustering study by gambling characteristics. BMJ Open. (2020) 18:e030424. doi: 10.1136/bmjopen-2019-030424

12. HIng N, Cherney L, Gainsbury SM, Lubman D, Wood RT, Blaszczynski A. Maintaining and losing control during internet gambling: a qualitative study of gamblers' experiences. New Media Soc . (2014) 17:1075–95. doi: 10.1177/1461444814521140

13. Hing N, Russell AM, Browne M. Risk factors for gambling problems on online electronic gaming machines, race betting and sports betting. Front Psychol . (2017) 8:779. doi: 10.3389/fpsyg.2017.00779

14. Gainsbury SM, Blaszczynski A. How blockchain and cryptocurrency technology could revolutionize online gambling. GLR . (2017) 21:482–92. doi: 10.1089/glr2.2017.2174

15. Shobeiri S, Laroche M, Mazaheri E. Haping e-retailer's website personality: the importance of experiential marketing. J Retail Consum Serv . (2013) 20:102–10. doi: 10.1016/j.jretconser.2012.10.011

16. Reith G. Techno economic systems and excessive consumption: a political economy of 'pathological' gambling. Br J Sociol . (2013) 64:717–38. doi: 10.1111/1468-4446.12050

17. Martin D. Consumer Technology and the Future of Gambling: How the 5 Biggest Consumer Tech Trends Will Shape the Internet Gambling Sector (2017–2020). Amsterdam: Acapture (2017).

18. European Commission. Towards a Comprehensive European Framework for Online Gambling (2012).

19. Guillou Landreat M. Facteurs de risque socio environnementaux In: Masson E, editor. Le jeu pathologique: comprendre, prévenir, traiter . Paris: Grall Bronnec (2012). p. 176. doi: 10.1016/B978-2-294-72671-2.00010-6

20. Vander Bilt J, Dodge HH, Pandav R, Shaffer HJ, Ganguli M. Gambling participation and social support among older adults: a longitudinal community study. J Gambl Stud. (2004) 20:373–89. doi: 10.1007/s10899-004-4580-0

21. Cousins SO, Witcher CS. Who plays bingo in later life? The sedentary lifestyles of 'little old ladies'. J Gambl Stud. (2007) 23:95–112. doi: 10.1007/s10899-006-9030-8

22. Wood S, Busemeyer J, Koling A, Cox CR, Davis H. Older adults as adaptive decision makers: evidence from the Iowa Gambling Task. Psychol Aging . (2005) 20:220–5. doi: 10.1037/0882-7974.20.2.220

23. Blaszczynski A, Nower L. A pathways model of problem and pathological gambling. Addiction . (2002) 97:487–99. doi: 10.1046/j.1360-0443.2002.00015.x

24. Griffiths M. Does gambling advertising contribute to problem gambling? Int J Ment Health Addict . (2005) 3:15–25. doi: 10.11575/PRISM/9487

25. Binde P. Gambling Advertising: A Critical Research Review. London: Responsible Gambling Trust (2014).

26. Hing N, Vitartas P, Lamont M. Promotion of Gambling and Live Betting Odds During Televised Sport: Influences on Gambling Participation and Problem Gambling. Lismore, NSW: Centre for Gambling Education and Research (2014).

27. Papineau E, Leblond J. [The stakes of online gambling in Canada: a public health analysis]. Can J Public Health . (2011) 102:417–20. doi: 10.1007/BF03404190

28. Sproston K, Hanley C, Brook K, Hing N, Gainsbury S. Marketing of Sports Betting and Racing. Melbourne, VIC: ORC international (2015).

29. Gainsbury SM, King DL, Russell AM, Delfabbro P, Derevensky J, Hing N. Exposure to and engagement with gambling marketing in social media: reported impacts on moderate-risk and problem gamblers. Psychol Addict Behav . (2016) 30:270–6. doi: 10.1037/adb0000156

30. Binde P, Romild U. Self-reported negative influence of gambling advertising in a swedish population-based sample. J Gambl Stud . (2019) 35:709–24. doi: 10.1007/s10899-018-9791-x

31. McCormack A, Shorter GW, Griffiths MD. An empirical study of gender differences in online gambling. J Gambl Stud . (2014) 30:71–88. doi: 10.1007/s10899-012-9341-x

32. ARCEP. Le baromètre du numérique (2020).

33. Gainsbury S, Russell A, King D, Delfabbro P, HIng N. Migration from social casino games to gambling: motivations and characteristics of gamers who gamble. Comput Hum Behav . (2016) 63:59–67. doi: 10.1016/j.chb.2016.05.021

34. Browne M, Hing N, Russell AMT, Thomas A, Jenkinson R. The impact of exposure to wagering advertisements and inducements on intended and actual betting expenditure: an ecological momentary assessment study. J Behav Addict . (2019) 8:146–56. doi: 10.1556/2006.8.2019.10

35. Deans EG, Thomas SL, Daube M, Derevensky J, Gordon R. Creating symbolic cultures of consumption: an analysis of the content of sports wagering advertisements in Australia. BMC Public Health . (2016) 16:208. doi: 10.1186/s12889-016-2849-8

36. Deans EG, Thomas SL, Derevensky J, Daube M. The influence of marketing on the sports betting attitudes and consumption behaviours of young men: implications for harm reduction and prevention strategies. Harm Reduct J . (2017) 14:5. doi: 10.1186/s12954-017-0131-8

37. Hing N, Russell AMT, Lamont M, Vitartas P. Bet Anywhere, anytime: an analysis of internet sports bettors' responses to gambling promotions during sports broadcasts by problem gambling severity. J Gambl Stud. (2017) 33:1051–65. doi: 10.1007/s10899-017-9671-9

38. Hing N, Russell AMT, Li E, Vitartas P. Does the uptake of wagering inducements predict impulse betting on sport? J Behav Addict . (2018) 7:146–57. doi: 10.1556/2006.7.2018.17

39. Lopez-Gonzalez H, Guerrero-Sole F, Estevez A, Griffiths M. Betting is loving and bettors are predators: a conceptual metaphor approach to online sports betting advertising. J Gambl Stud . (2018) 34:709–26. doi: 10.1007/s10899-017-9727-x

40. Macniven R, Kelly B, King L. Unhealthy product sponsorship of Australian national and state sports organisations. Health Promot J Aust . (2011) 26:52–6. doi: 10.1071/HE14010

41. Maher A, Wilson N, Signal L, Thomson G. Patterns of sports sponsorship by gambling, alcohol and food companies: an Internet survey. BMC Public Health . (2006) 6:95. doi: 10.1186/1471-2458-6-95

42. Pitt H, Thomas SL, Bestman A, Stoneham M, Daube M. “It's just everywhere!” Children and parents discuss the marketing of sports wagering in Australia. Aust N Z J Public Health . (2016) 40:480–6. doi: 10.1111/1753-6405.12564

43. Pitt H, Thomas SL, Bestman A. Initiation, influence, and impact: adolescents and parents discuss the marketing of gambling products during Australian sporting matches. BMC Public Health . (2016) 16:967. doi: 10.1186/s12889-016-3610-z

44. Russell AMT, Hing N, Browne M, Rawat V. Are direct messages (texts and emails) from wagering operators associated with betting intention and behaviour? An ecological momentary assessment study. J Behav Addict . (2018) 7:1079–90. doi: 10.1556/2006.7.2018.99

45. Thomas SL, Bestman A, Pitt H, Cassidy R, McCarthy S, Nyemcsok C, et al. Young people's awareness of the timing and placement of gambling advertising on traditional and social media platforms: a study of 11-16-year-olds in Australia. Harm Reduct J. (2018) 15:51. doi: 10.1186/s12954-018-0254-6

46. Abarbanel B, Gainsbury S, King D, Hing N, Delfabbro P. Gambling games on social platforms: how do avdertisements for social casino games target young adults?. Policy Intern. (2017) 9:184–209. doi: 10.1002/poi3.135

47. Gainsbury SM, Russell A, Blaszczynski A, Hing N. Greater involvement and diversity of Internet gambling as a risk factor for problem gambling. Eur J Public Health . (2015) 25:723–8. doi: 10.1093/eurpub/ckv006

48. Stead M, Dobbie F, Angus K, Purves RI, Reith G, Macdonald L. The Online Bingo Boom in the UK: a qualitative examination of its appeal. PLoS ONE . (2016) 11:e0154763. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0154763

49. Gainsbury S, King D, HIng N, Delfabbro P. Social media marketing and gambling: an interview study of gambling operators in Australia. Int Gambl Stud. (2015) 15:377–93. doi: 10.1080/14459795.2015.1058409

50. Gainsbury SM, Delfabbro P, King DL, Hing N. An exploratory study of gambling operators' use of social media and the latent messages conveyed. J Gambl Stud. (2016) 32:125–41. doi: 10.1007/s10899-015-9525-2

51. McMullan JL, Kervin M. Selling Internet gambling: advertising, New media and the content of poker promotion. Int J Ment Health Addict . (2012) 10:622–45. doi: 10.1007/s11469-011-9336-3

52. Howe PDL, Vargas-Saenz A, Hulbert CA, Boldero JM. Predictors of gambling and problem gambling in Victoria, Australia. PLoS ONE . (2019) 14:e0209277. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0209277

53. Thomas SL, Randle M, Bestman A, Pitt H, Bowe SJ, Cowlishaw S, et al. Public attitudes towards gambling product harm and harm reduction strategies: an online study of 16-88 year olds in Victoria, Australia. Harm Reduct J. (2017) 14:49. doi: 10.1186/s12954-017-0173-y

54. eMarketer. Mobile Gambling: A Good Bet (2020)

55. Moore S, Ohtsuka K. The prediction of gambling behavior and problem gambling from attitudes and perceived norms. Soc Behav Pers. (1999) 27:455–66. doi: 10.2224/sbp.1999.27.5.455

56. Shang R, Chen Y, Lia H. The Value of Participation in Virtual Consumer Communities on Brand Loyalty. Taiwan: Internet Research Emerald Group Publishing Limited (2006). doi: 10.1108/10662240610690025

57. Jernigan D, O''Hara J. Alcohol Advertising and Promotion. Reducing Underage Drinking: A Collective Responsibility. Washington, DC: National Academy Press (2004). p. 625–53.

58. Habibi M, Laroche M, Richard M. The roles of brand community and community engagement in building brand trust on social media. Comput Hum Behav. (2014) 37:152–61. doi: 10.1016/j.chb.2014.04.016

59. Knight L. Social media for the gambling sector. Blogpost: 4PsMarketing (2012).

60. Behmann M. Analysis of the Role of social media marketing and communication in the online gambling market (Unpublished Honours Thesis). University of Malta (2013).

61. Qubit. UK gambling benchmark. White paper (2012).

62. Gordon R, Chapman M. Brand Community and Sports Betting in Australia. Melbourne, VIC: Victorian Responsible Gambling Foundation (2014).

63. Lindsay S, Thomas S, Lewis S, Westberg K, Moodie R, Jones S. Eat, drink and gamble: marketing messages about 'risky' products in an Australian major sporting series. BMC Public Health . (2013) 13:719. doi: 10.1186/1471-2458-13-719

64. Derevensky J, Sklar A, Gupta R, Messerlian C, Laroche M, Mansour S. The Effects of Gambling Advertisements on Children and Adolescent Gambling Attitudes and Behaviors. Montreal, QC: McGill University 2007.

65. Parke A, Harris A, Parke J, Rigbye JA. B. Responsible marketing and advertising in gambling: a critical review. J Gambl Bus Econ. (2014) 8:21–35. doi: 10.5750/jgbe.v8i3.972

66. Gainsbury SM, Russell A, Hing N, Wood R, Blaszczynski A. The impact of internet gambling on gambling problems: a comparison of moderate-risk and problem Internet and non-Internet gamblers. Psychol Addict Behav . (2013) 27:1092–101. doi: 10.1037/a0031475

67. McMullan JL. Submission to the Joint Select Committee on gambling reform Inquiry Into Interactive Gambling. Parliament of Australia (2011). Available online at: http://www.aph.gov.au/senate/committee/gamblingreform_ctte/interactive_online_gambling_advertising/submissions.htm

68. Romo L, Legauffre C, Guilleux A, Valleur M, Magalon D, Fatseas M, et al. Cognitive distortions and ADHD in pathological gambling: a national longitudinal case-control cohort study. J Behav Addict . (2016) 5:649–57. doi: 10.1556/2006.5.2016.070

69. Guillou Landreat M, Deriennic J, Brunault P, Challet Bouju G, Gallopel Morvan K, Grall Bronnec M. [Gambling marketing: a public health concern?]. Presse Med . (2019) 48:347–52. doi: 10.1016/j.lpm.2019.02.012

70. Corti B, Holman C, Donovan R, Frizzell S, Carroll A. Using sponsorship to create healthy environments for sport, racingand arts venues in Western Australia. Health Promot Int . (1995) 10:185–97. doi: 10.1093/heapro/10.3.185

71. Hing N. Sports Betting and Advertising (AGRC Discussion Paper No. 4). Melbourne, QC: Australian Gambling Research Centre (2014).

72. Newall PWS, Thobhani A, Walasek L, Meyer C. Live-odds gambling advertising and consumer protection PLoS ONE . (2019) 14:e0216876. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0216876

73. Babor TF, Jernigan D, Brookes C, Brown K. Toward a public health approach to the protection of vulnerable populations from the harmful effects of alcohol marketing. Addiction . (2017) 112(Suppl. 1):125–7. doi: 10.1111/add.13682

74. Burge AN, Pietrzak RH, Molina CA, Petry NM. Age of gambling initiation and severity of gambling and health problems among older adult problem gamblers. Psychiatr Serv . (2004) 55:1437–9. doi: 10.1176/appi.ps.55.12.1437

75. Burge AN, Pietrzak RH, Petry NM. Pre/early adolescent onset of gambling and psychosocial problems in treatment-seeking pathological gamblers. J Gambl Stud . (2006) 22:263–74. doi: 10.1007/s10899-006-9015-7

76. Jimenez-Murcie S, Alvarez-Moya E, Stinchfield R, Fernandez-Aranda R, Granero R, Aynami N, et al. Age of onset in pathological gambling: clinical, therapeutic and personality correlates J Gambl Stud . (2010) 26:235–48. doi: 10.1007/s10899-009-9175-3

77. Derevensky J, Sklar A, Gupta R, Messerlian C. An empirical study examining the impact of gambling advertisements on adolescent gambling attitudes and behaviors Int J Ment Health Addict . (2010) 8:21–34. doi: 10.1007/s11469-009-9211-7

78. Gainsbury S, Russell A, Wood C, HIng N. How risky is Internet gambling? A comparison of subgroups of Internet gamblersbased on problem gambling status. New Media Soc. (2014). 78:861–79. doi: 10.1177/1461444813518185

79. Raco E. Aussie Teens Online Australia (2014).

80. Wood RT, Williams RJ. A comparative profile of the Internet gambler: demographic characteristics, game-play patterns, and problem-gambling status. New Media Soc . (2011) 13:1123–41. doi: 10.1177/1461444810397650

81. Gainsbury S, King D, Abarbanel B, Delfabbro P, Hing N. Convergence of Gambling and Gaming in Digital Media. Melbourne, VIC: Victorian Responsible Gambling Foundation (2015).

82. Pitt H, Thomas SL, Bestman A, Daube M, Derevensky J. What do children observe and learn from televised sports betting advertisements? A qualitative study among Australian children. Aust N Z J Public Health . (2017) 41:604–10. doi: 10.1111/1753-6405.12728

83. Houghton S, Hunter SC, Rosenberg M, Wood L, Zadow C, Martin K, et al. Virtually impossible: limiting Australian children and adolescents daily screen based media use. BMC Public Health . (2015) 15:5. doi: 10.1186/1471-2458-15-5

84. Thomas S, Pitt H, Bestman A, Randle M, Stoneham M, Daube M. Child and Parent Recall of Gambling Sponsorship in Autsralia Victoria. Victorian responsible Gambling Foundation (2016).

85. Commission G. Gambling Participation in 2016: Behavior Awareness and Attitudes. Birmingham: England Gambling Commission (2017).

86. Volberg RA, Gupta R, Griffiths MD, Olason DT, Delfabbro P. An international perspective on youth gambling prevalence studies. Int J Adolesc Med Health . (2010) 22:3–38. doi: 10.1515/9783110255690.21

87. Delfabbro P, King D, Griffiths MD. From adolescent to adult gambling: an analysis of longitudinal gambling patterns in South Australia. J Gambl Stud . (2014) 30:547–63. doi: 10.1007/s10899-013-9384-7

88. Castren S, Grainger M, Lahti T, Alho H, Salonen AH. At-risk and problem gambling among adolescents: a convenience sample of first-year junior high school students in Finland. Subst Abuse Treat Prev Policy . (2015) 10:9. doi: 10.1186/s13011-015-0003-8

89. Froberg F, Rosendahl IK, Abbott M, Romild U, Tengstrom A, Hallqvist J. The incidence of problem gambling in a representative cohort of Swedish female and male 16-24 year-olds by socio-demographic characteristics, in comparison with 25-44 year-olds. J Gambl Stud . (2015) 31:621–41. doi: 10.1007/s10899-014-9450-9

90. Martin I, Kamins M, Pirouz DM, Davis S, Haws K, Mirabito A, et al. On the road to addiction: the facilitative and prveentive roles of marketing cues. J Bus Res. (2013) 66:1219–26. doi: 10.1016/j.jbusres.2012.08.015

91. Gainsbury SM, Abarbanel BLL, Philander KS, Butler JV. Strategies to customize responsible gambling messages: a review and focus group study. BMC Public Health . (2018) 18:1381. doi: 10.1186/s12889-018-6281-0

92. Adams PJ, Rossen F. A tale of missed opportunities: pursuit of a public health approach to gambling in New Zealand. Addiction . (2012) 107:1051–6. doi: 10.1111/j.1360-0443.2012.03800.x

93. McAllister I. Public opinion towards gambling and gambling regulation in Australia. Int Gambl Stud. (2014) 14:146–60. doi: 10.1080/14459795.2013.861001

94. Yani-de-Soriano Y, Javed U, Yousafzai S. Can an Industry Be Socially Responsible if its products hamr consumers? The cas of online Gambling. J Bus Ethics . (2012) 110:481–97. doi: 10.1007/s10551-012-1495-z

95. Online Ads Overtake TV Ads for Complaints With Double the Cases (2018).

96. Petticrew M, Katikireddi SV, Knai C, Cassidy R, Maani Hessari N, Thomas J, et al. 'Nothing can be done until everything is done': the use of complexity arguments by food, beverage, alcohol and gambling industries. J Epidemiol Community Health . (2017) 71:1078–83. doi: 10.1136/jech-2017-209710

97. Thomas S, Lewis S, Duong J, McLeod C. Sports betting marketing during sporting events: a stadium and broadcast census of Australian Football League matches. Aust N Z J Public Health . (2012) 36:145–52. doi: 10.1111/j.1753-6405.2012.00856.x

98. Thomas SL, Lewis S, Westberg K. 'You just change the channel if you don't like what you're going to hear': gamblers' attitudes towards, and interactions with, social marketing campaigns. Health Expect . (2015) 18:124–36. doi: 10.1111/hex.12018

99. Lee HS, Lemanski JL, Jun JW. Role of gambling media exposure in influencing trajectories among college students. J Gambl Stud . (2008) 24:25–37. doi: 10.1007/s10899-007-9078-0

100. Romer D, Moreno M. Digital media and risks for adolescent substance abuse and problematic gambling. Pediatrics . (2017) 140(Suppl. 2):S102–6. doi: 10.1542/peds.2016-1758L

101. Lim M, Hare J, Carrotte E, Dietze P. An investigation of strategies used in alcohol brand marketing and alcohol-related health promotion on Facebook. Digital Health . (2016) 2:2055207616647305. doi: 10.1177/2055207616647305

102. Lawn S, Oster C, Riley B, Smith D, Baigent M, Rahamathulla M. A literature review and gap analysis of emerging technologies and new trends in gambling. Int J Environ Res Public Health. (2020) 17:744. doi: 10.3390/ijerph17030744

103. Messerlian C, Derevensky J. Social marketing campaigns for youth gambling prevention: lessons learned from youth. Int J Ment Health Addiction . (2006) 4:294–306. doi: 10.1007/s11469-006-9032-x

Keywords: gambling, marketing, online, betting, advertising

Citation: Guillou-Landreat M, Gallopel-Morvan K, Lever D, Le Goff D and Le Reste J-Y (2021) Gambling Marketing Strategies and the Internet: What Do We Know? A Systematic Review. Front. Psychiatry 12:583817. doi: 10.3389/fpsyt.2021.583817

Received: 15 July 2020; Accepted: 02 February 2021; Published: 26 February 2021.

Reviewed by:

Copyright © 2021 Guillou-Landreat, Gallopel-Morvan, Lever, Le Goff and Le Reste. This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (CC BY) . The use, distribution or reproduction in other forums is permitted, provided the original author(s) and the copyright owner(s) are credited and that the original publication in this journal is cited, in accordance with accepted academic practice. No use, distribution or reproduction is permitted which does not comply with these terms.

*Correspondence: Morgane Guillou-Landreat, morgane.guillou@chu-brest.fr

Disclaimer: All claims expressed in this article are solely those of the authors and do not necessarily represent those of their affiliated organizations, or those of the publisher, the editors and the reviewers. Any product that may be evaluated in this article or claim that may be made by its manufacturer is not guaranteed or endorsed by the publisher.

Exploring the Impact of Gambling Advertising: An Interview Study of Problem Gamblers

• Published: 20 December 2008
• Volume 7 , pages 541–554, ( 2009 )

Cite this article

• Per Binde 1  

5016 Accesses

73 Citations

Explore all metrics

This study qualitatively explored the impact of gambling advertising on problem gambling by interviewing twenty-five people with current or past gambling problems. Interviews were relatively long and involved the participants’ viewing numerous examples of gambling advertising. A quarter of the participants reported that gambling advertising had no impact on their problems, slightly over half of them reported that advertising had a marginal impact, and one fifth reported a tangible impact. However, none considered advertising to be a main cause of their gambling problems. The negative self-perceived impact was primarily that advertising triggered impulses to gamble. Advertising thus increased already high involvement in gambling and/or made it harder to stick to a decision to gamble less or not at all.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Price includes VAT (Russian Federation)

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Rent this article via DeepDyve

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

Self-Reported Negative Influence of Gambling Advertising in a Swedish Population-Based Sample

Per Binde & Ulla Romild

Relationships Between Exposure to Different Gambling Advertising Types, Advertising Impact and Problem Gambling

André Syvertsen, Eilin K. Erevik, … Ståle Pallesen

Are There Riskier Types of Gambling?

Nolan B. Gooding & Robert J. Williams

American Psychiatric Association (1994). Diagnostic and statistical manual of mental disorders (4th ed.). Washington, DC: American Psychiatric Association.

Google Scholar  

Amey, B. (2001). People’s participation in and attitudes to gaming, 1985–2000: Final results of the 2000 survey . Wellington: Department of Internal Affairs.

Binde, P. (2005). Att sälja en dröm: Om spelreklam och dess påverkan . Stockholm: Statens folkhälsoinstitut.

Binde, P. (2007a). Selling dreams—causing nightmares? On gambling advertising and problem gambling. Journal of Gambling Issues , 20 , 167–192.

Binde, P. (2007b). Spelreklam och spelberoende: En intervjustudie . Östersund: Statens folkhälsoinstitut.

Bonke, J. (2007). Ludomani i Danmark II: Faktorer af betydning for spilleproblemer . København: Socialforskningsinstituttet.

Boughton, R., Brewster, J. M. (2002). Voices of women who gamble in Ontario: A survey of women’s gambling, barriers to treatment and treatment service needs. Retrieved October 12, 2008, from http://www.gamblingresearch.org/download.sz/voicesofwomen%20Boughton%20(1).pdf?docid=1524 .

Brown, R. I. F. (1988). Models of gambling and gambling addictions as perceptual filters. Journal of Gambling Behavior , 3 (4), 224–236. doi: 10.1007/BF01019882 .

Article   Google Scholar  

Carlson, M. J., & Moore, T. L. (1998). Adolescent gambling in Oregon: A report to the Oregon Gambling Addiction Treatment Foundation . Salem, ON: Oregon Gambling Addiction Treatment Foundation.

Clotfelter, C. T., & Cook, P. J. (1989). Selling hope: State lotteries in America . Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.

Crockford, D. N., Goodyear, B., Edwards, J., Quickfall, J., & el-Guebaly, N. (2005). Cue-induced brain activity in pathological gamblers. Biological Psychiatry , 58 (10), 787–795. doi: 10.1016/j.biopsych.2005.04.037 .

Article   PubMed   Google Scholar  

Drummond, D. C., & Glautier, S. (1994). A controlled trial of cue exposure treatment in alcohol dependence. Journal of Consulting Clinical Psychology , 62 (4), 809–817. doi: 10.1037/0022-006X.62.4.809 .

Article   CAS   PubMed   Google Scholar  

Gambling Impact and Behavior Study (1999). Report to the National Gambling Impact Study Commission . Chicago, IL: National Opinion Research Center at the University of Chicago.

Gehring, V. V. (1999). The American state lottery: Sale or swindle? International Journal of Applied Philosolophy , 13(2).

Goudriaan, A. E., Oosterlaan, J., de Beurs, E., & Van den Brink, W. (2004). Pathological gambling: A comprehensive review of biobehavioral findings. Neuroscience & Biobehavioral Reviews , 28 (2), 123–141. doi: 10.1016/j.neubiorev.2004.03.001 .

Grant, J. E., & Kim, S. W. (2001). Demographic and clinical features of 131 adult pathological gamblers. Journal of Clinical Psychiatry , 62 (12), 957–962.

CAS   PubMed   Google Scholar  

Griffiths, M. D. (2005). Does gambling advertising contribute to problem gambling? International Journal of Mental Health and Addiction , 3 (2), 15–25.

Haracz, J. L., Mash, D. C., & Sircar, R. (1999). A multicomponent learning model of drug abuse: Drug taking and craving may involve separate brain circuits underlying instrumental and classical conditioning, respectively. Annals of New York Academy of Sciences , 877 , 811–819. doi: 10.1111/j.1749-6632.1999.tb09329.x .

Article   CAS   Google Scholar  

Heath, R. (2000). Low involvement processing — a new model of brands and advertising. International Journal of Advertising , 19 (3), 287–298.

Heath, R., Brandt, D., & Nairn, A. (2006). Brand relationships: Strengthened by emotion, weakened by attention. Journal of Advertising Ressearch , 46 (4), 410–419. doi: 10.2501/S002184990606048X .

Jones, M. J. (2001). Odds should improve for lottery advertising guidelines. Gaming Law Review , 5 (3), 161–163. doi: 10.1089/10921880152486843 .

Jonsson, J., Andrén, A., Nilsson, T., Svensson, O., Munck, I., Kindstedt, A., et al. (2003). Spelberoende i Sverige—vad kännetecknar personer med spelproblem? Rapport om andra fasen av den svenska nationella studien av spel och spelberoende . Stockholm: Statens folkhälsoinstitut.

Korn, D., Hurson, T., & Reynolds, J. (2003). Commercial gambling advertising: Possible impact on youth knowledge, attitudes, beliefs and behavioural intentions . Guelph: Ontario Problem Gambling Research Centre. Retrieved October 12, 2008, from: http://www.gamblingresearch.org/download.sz/125%20Final%20Report%20-%2012APR05.pdf?docid=6481 .

Lee, H.-S., Lee Lemanski, J., & Jun, J. W. (2008). Role of gambling media exposure in influencing trajectories among college students. Journal of Gambling Studies , 24 (1), 25–37. doi: 10.1007/s10899-007-9078-0 .

Lesieur, H. R., & Blume, S. B. (1987). The South Oaks Gambling Screen (SOGS): A new instrument for the identification of pathological gamblers. American Journal of Psychiatry , 144 (9), 1184–1188.

Lund, I. (2008). The population mean and the proportion of frequent gamblers: Is the theory of total consumption valid for gambling? Journal of Gambling Studies , 24 (2), 247–256. doi: 10.1007/s10899-007-9081-5 .

Miller, R., & Mizerski, R. (1998). Investigating the relationship between ad recall, affect toward the producer and the purchase of three number lotto tickets (work in progress) . Paper presented at the ANZMAC98 Conference, Otago, New Zealand, November 30–December 2, 1998. Retreived October 12, 2008, from: http://130.195.95.71:8081/www/ANZMAC1998/Cd_rom/Miller268.pdf .

Oakes, J., Battersby, M. W., Pols, R. G., & Cromarty, P. (2008). Exposure therapy for problem gambling via videoconferencing: A case report. Journal of Gambling Studies , 24 (1), 107–118. doi: 10.1007/s10899-007-9074-4 .

Potenza, M. N., Steinberg, M. A., Skudlarski, P., Fulbright, R. K., Lacadie, C. M., Wilber, M. K., et al. (2003). Gambling urges in pathological gambling. Archives of General Psychiatry , 60 (8), 828–836. doi: 10.1001/archpsyc.60.8.828 .

Poulin, C. (2006). Gambling. Canadian Medical Association Journal , 175 (10), 1208–1209. doi: 10.1503/cmaj.061299 .

Rönnberg, S., Volberg, R. A., Abbott, M. W., Moore, W. L., Andrén, A., Munck, I., et al. (1999). Gambling and problem gambling in Sweden . Stockholm: Statens folkhälsoinstitut.

Shenk, J. W. (1995). Everyone’s a loser: How lottery ads entice the wrong people to gamble. The Washington Monthly , 27 (7/8), 22–25.

Stranahan, H., & O’Malley Borg, M. (1998). Horizontal equity implications of the lottery tax. National Tax Journal , 51 (1), 71–82.

Symes, B. A., & Nicki, R. M. (1997). A preliminary consideration of cue-exposure, response-prevention treatment for pathological gambling behaviour: Two case studies. Journal of Gambling Studies , 13 (2), 145–157. doi: 10.1023/A:1024951301959 .

Tavares, H., Zilberman, M. L., Hodgins, D. C., & el-Guebaly, N. (2005). Comparison of craving between pathological gamblers and alcoholics. Alcoholism: Clinical & Experimental Research , 29 (8), 1427–1431. doi: 10.1097/01.alc.0000175071.22872.98 .

Download references

Acknowledgements

This research has been funded by the Swedish National Institute of Public Health. Some of the arguments have appeared in Swedish in the report Spelreklam och spelberoende: En intervjustudie (Binde 2007b ). The paper was presented at the European Association for the Study of Gambling (EASG) conference in Nova Gorizia, Slovenia, 1–4 July 2008. I am thankful for comments received on that occasion.

Author information

Authors and affiliations.

Center for Public Sector Research (CEFOS), University of Gothenburg, P.O. Box 720, SE-405 30, Gothenburg, Sweden

You can also search for this author in PubMed   Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Per Binde .

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Binde, P. Exploring the Impact of Gambling Advertising: An Interview Study of Problem Gamblers. Int J Ment Health Addiction 7 , 541–554 (2009). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11469-008-9186-9

Download citation

Received : 17 November 2008

Accepted : 03 December 2008

Published : 20 December 2008

Issue Date : October 2009

DOI : https://doi.org/10.1007/s11469-008-9186-9

Share this article

Anyone you share the following link with will be able to read this content:

Sorry, a shareable link is not currently available for this article.

Provided by the Springer Nature SharedIt content-sharing initiative

• Problem gambling
• Advertising
• Conditioning
• Find a journal
• Publish with us
• Track your research