You can’t miss it. Whether you’re passing by the ScotBet shop on Nicholson Street, or at Potterrow watching the Champions League with friends, sports gambling and its sponsorships are everywhere. It feels like sports gambling sponsors are striving for the same advertisement markets alcohol companies have used for decades.
The reasons for the incursion are self explanatory. The gambling sites could not ask for better targeted ads than sports fans themselves. Additionally, the lack of a natural dominance among the websites means the competition is fierce. While partnerships between clubs and alcoholic beverages are iconic to say the least — the Liverpool-Carlsberg sponsorship practically embodies pure nostalgia — the same cannot be said with betting sponsors.
When Carlsberg initially sponsored Liverpool, alcohol sponsorships were ‘commercially invisible’, meaning there was little pushback from fans due to the normalised presence of alcohol in society. Commercial invisibility is being achieved by gambling as well, as the shock factor the advertisements have had is being completely erased.
Carlsberg and Guinness have achieved their endpoints as two of the most popular beers in the UK and are already culturally interlinked with football and rugby. Sports gambling is at an awkward midpoint from which it is desperate to escape, as it is still viewed by casual fans as a somewhat toxic element within sport. What do the betting companies have going for them? Oh, just the backing of billions of pounds. In fact, the wealthiest woman in the UK built her fortune on the popular Bet365 online sports betting platform.
As the betting sites’ fortunes grow larger, we are starting to see some pushback on sports betting. At the start of this year’s Premier League season, clubs collectively agreed to “withdraw gambling sponsorships from the front of matchday shirts”, yet still allow gambling sponsors to be on the sleeves and training shirts. Simultaneously, the House of Commons are discussing stricter legislation on sports gambling. As a result, club owners in the Premier League are pre-emptively ‘self-regulating’ in an effort to avoid losing precious revenue. This ‘regulation’ serves mainly cosmetic purposes. A management of perception rather than taking a stand for any deep rooted values. Reactionary change is not true change but obedience.
Despite legislation — closely negotiated to match what companies are willing to accept, no doubt — sports betting advertisements are spreading and now seem unavoidable. Leagues and broadcasters around the world have found a new source of revenue they will be desperate to keep, and role-model athletes are taking deals to become brand representatives, including superstars such as Lebron James.
Only a sensitive sucker would stop to consider where the revenue comes from. The impoverishment of addicts and the desperate has rarely been a sufficient reason to deprive the wealthiest of further riches. Why would now be any different?
“Sports betting” by Marit & Toomas Hinnosaar is licensed under CC BY 2.0.