Perceived risk & gambling Essay

As of 2008, there were more than 2,000 internet gambling sites worldwide; with combined revenue of these websites being estimated to be north of $18 billion (Overview of Gambling Regulations, 2008). Due to its obscene rate of growth, potential harm to its consumers and growing ease of accessibility, internet gambling is viewed by many as a major cause for concern. Don’t expect the apprehension towards online gambling to ease up any time soon. Casinos, of both the online and brick-and-mortar variety are expected to aggressively increase their marketing budget over the next half decade. With online gambling recently legalized in Nevada, and many states preparing to follow suit, Simon Holliday, director at H2 Gambling Capital predicts that nearly $4 billion could be spent by the internet gaming sector over the next five years (Jackpot! , 2012). The Gambling Act of 2005 was introduced to modernize gambling regulations. The act brought increased marketing freedom for gambling companies, but only along with responsibility regarding the advocacy of the potential dangers of addiction. It also required the implementation of Corporate Social Responsibility (CSR) policy and the anticipated goal was to introduce, acknowledge and bring to light to substantial harm which can stem from problematic gambling. According to the Gambling Act of 2005, in order for a company to obtain their license and legally operate in the marketplace they had to ensure that: i. Gambling is conducted in a fair and open way; ii. Children and other vulnerable people are protected from being harmed or exploited by gambling; and iii. Assistance is made available to people who are, or may be, affected by problems related to gambling. (GamCare: gambling research, education & treatment) With the changing landscape in the industry, it is fair to question whether these regulations are still relevant, and more even importantly, whether companies are still operating within the bounds of the Gambling Act of 2005. Technological advances have led to online websites readily available around the clock, potentially made gambling available to minors (via online casinos, online sports betting) and lost control of potential hazards concerning online users, those being: sobriety (users drunk/high while on a online gaming site); awareness (many ads online promoting gambling, very few raising awareness); and whom is using the sites (minors, youth, seniors, or problematic/addictive users). All of this unsurprisingly raises concerns regarding whether the current regulations are equipped to handle both current and future gambling disputes. Gambling consumption has no doubt increased over the past decade, and will continue to do so for the foreseeable future as regulations are expected to loosen while the marketing budget of online casinos are expected to abruptly expand (Jackpot! , 2012). The bulk of the marketing expenditures will be geared towards youth via interactive media sources; interactive online ad-agencies figure to be the main beneficiary. Though casinos will continue marketing to those who frequent physically existing casinos (a crowd mainly over 50) via television, magazine and billboard advertisements, the majority of the expanded marketing budget figures to be aimed at online users – the vast majority of which are in their 20’s (Jackpot, 2012). There seems to be an array of ethical concerns tied into all of this – whether children and â€Å"other vulnerable people† are still protected from potential harm, how readily available is assistance to those who are affected and is it being outweighed by the onslaught on pro-gambling marketing, concerns regarding online gambling (sobriety, minors, problem identification), and ultimately whether the advocacy is still a priority. A widespread fact in the gambling industry is that 20% of the gambling population accounts for 80% of the gambling industry’s revenue (Galanda, 2007), essentially implying that when evaluating the entire gambling population, 20% are pouring a considerable amount of money into the industry and could potentially be labelled as problematic gamblers. With casinos paying more money and attention to marketing, and marketing research, they are able to identify the age, demographics, frequency and income of their market. Via frequent gambler cards, visas and other channels (surveys for points/credits, casino identification/reloadable slot cards), casinos are able to pick and choose who they zero their marketing efforts in on, whether that be seniors, twenty-somethings or potentially the 20% we earlier identified as problematic gamblers. Corporate Social Responsibility (CSR) was incorporated into the Gambling Act (2005) as a means of regulatory control and functions as a built-in, self-regulating instrument intended to designate ethical standards to which companies must adhere to. Gambling companies possessing information about their customers, and using this information to formulate a marketing strategy and plan, raises ethical concerns and seeds the question of whether this type of behaviour corresponds to the regulations and ethical policies within CSR. Three main differences between gambling now and nearly a decade ago when the Gambling Act was introduced are: (1) distribution channels have increased accessibility to gambling and exposure to gambling promotion; (2) the technological innovation developed by online casinos is tremendously exceeding government control efforts; and (3) gambling has simply become an international phenomenon – the gambling population is aggressively expanding (Social Marketing & Problem Gambling, 2011). Though the effects and consequences of problem gambling are more extreme and common than ever, the reasons described above explain why it is so difficult for government to control the issue, and moreover why the trend is currently liberalizing ideologies rather than attacking the corporations and addressing the underlying issues.