AGA hits back after study suggests leading US operators don’t follow ad guidelines
The American Gaming Association (AGA) says a British study claiming US operators aren’t following industry rules on responsible gaming messaging in advertising is an “irresponsible misinterpretation” of the facts.
The AGA’s response came after the Guardian exclusively released a University of Bristol study earlier this week. Academics at the university say four US sportsbooks – BetMGM, DraftKings, ESPN Bet and FanDuel – failed to include messages on problem gambling (PG) support in 74.8% of non-sponsored posts in one week over the summer.
The academics scrutinised 1,353 posts on social media sites. They looked at Facebook, Instagram, TikTok and X. There were an average of 237 posts and adverts a day from the four companies combined. These posts were collectively viewed around 29 million times.
The study found close to three-quarters “may breach” the AGA’s code on marketing. The guidelines were first established in 2019. They stipulate all ads must include a “conspicuous responsible gaming message” alongside a toll-free helpline number. But the code is not a mandate, it is a suggestion.
Posts vs. ads
The AGA disputes the research, arguing the operators’ posts weren’t ads. They were driving brand awareness, rather than encouraging social followers to bet, it said.
“Like companies across other industries, sports betting operators provide relevant, engaging content to customers designed to maintain brand awareness without promoting a specific offering that is covered by the code, like sports betting,” AGA senior vice president Joe Maloney said.
“To describe the sharing of sports facts, schedules or discussion topics via tweets and posts on social media platforms as advertising and thus applicable to our code is an irresponsible misinterpretation.”
Whether or not a post for a brand constitutes advertising is debatable. The University of Bristol lecturer Raffaello Rossi argues any social media posts were “are clearly seen as advertising now”.
However, Maloney believes gambling companies should be no different from others in the 21st century B2C sector when utilising the digital space, making a comparison to the fashion industry.
Maloney explained to iGB: “This is no different from Gap or Banana Republic wanting to ask followers on social media platforms, ‘it’s Fall right now, what are you wearing as the temperature cools?’”
AGA “proud” of its members
The Guardian added – seven paragraphs in – that 310 paid adverts for the four sportsbooks included PG messaging and helpline numbers.
The AGA stated it was “pleased” all paid social media ads contained the problem gambling aspects outlined by the code. Maloney reiterated his belief that the US industry is being responsible in regards to its marketing.
“We’re proud of our members’ responsible advertising practices and their commitment to upholding strong industry standards, which continues to grow consumer trust in our industry’s overall commitment to responsibility,” he explained.
Calls for further regulation
US gambling interest has rocketed since the Supreme Court’s 2018 reversal of the Professional and Amateur Sports Protection Act.
Rossi claims the industry’s growth since then has far exceeded the progress of regulation. That led to the issues raised in the study.
In the report are numerous recommendations to ease concerns. Among them is a call for overarching federal laws to aid “consistent regulation” of marketing.
Maloney, however, believes federal regulation is unnecessary.
“Six years into legal sports betting, introducing federal overregulation would undermine the ability of state regulators and lawmakers to tailor appropriate policy as their marketplaces continue to evolve, and only serve to empower the highly visible illegal market,” he said.
Maloney believes while there is a “very interesting conversation” to have on what comprises advertising and what doesn’t. But he says, studies like this one don’t allow such discourse to occur by failing to reflect the industry’s reality.
“Overly simplifying it and eliminating any opportunity to have that conversation, as well as using it as a means to be prescriptive in policy, strikes us as a very swift move in not engaging stakeholders and misinforming the wider community that seeks to provide and demonstrate compliance,” Maloney told iGB.
