UK advertising regulator, the Advertising Standards Authority (ASA), has upheld three independent rulings against Betway, Kwiff and Sky Bet - deeming that adverts run by the operators were each in breach of the CAP Code for strong appeal to under-18s.
Indeed, Betway's pre-roll YouTube ad was deemed in breach of regulatory codes for due to the prominent posting of the Chelsea FC logo worn by fans on clothing and scarves - with Kwiff and Sky Bet's being deemed in breach for the respective featuring of Sir Lewis Hamilton and Gary Neville.
These three independent rulings represent an interesting case study for the UK's current stance on gambling advertising restrictions - especially in comparison to alternative global markets. Evidently, the unifying catalyst of all three of the rulings is social media. However, do the murky waters of legal linguistic ambiguity create a perfect storm for operator misinterpretation?
The rulings
A crucial definition laid out as part of the CAP Code states that marketing communication for gambling must not "be likely to be of strong appeal to children or young persons, especially by reflecting or being associated with youth culture." This sub-section of the wider code is important within the context of all three of these upheld rulings.
Beginning with Betway, the ASA has specified that an accumulation of factors led to the ruling that deemed its advertisement featuring the Chelsea FC logo to be unfit for air. The Authority stated that it would have been acceptable for the logo to appear "in a standalone context," but that it, in fact, appeared frequently across multiple mediums such a billboards, clothing, lanyards and more. Further, perhaps more importantly, it was also specified that YouTube is a user self-age-verified platform with many under-18 users. Conclusively, the advert has been deemed to be of appeal to minors due to the inclusion of the Chelsea logo in the context of gambling, as it is an institution widely supported by children.
The Kwiff ruling draws on similar conclusions, with X (Twitter) representing an additional accessible space to underage users and Sir Lewis Hamilton being deemed by the ASA to be an influential figure to underage persons. Kwiff's argument is centred around the fact that the operator had, indeed, followed CAP advice that states motorsports is a more "adult-oriented" sport. Nevertheless, the ASA has upheld the ban on this particular endorsement.
Regarding the Sky Bet advertisement featuring Gary Neville, the authority deemed Neville's punditry presence to be a defining factor in his celebrity appeal to youth and youth culture, ruling that - similarly to Kwiff's Lewis Hamilton ad - the advertisement would have been acceptable had it appeared in a different context.
UK: Leading the way?
Advertising restrictions are perhaps the key regulatory indicator of a market's leniency towards the gambling industry. Certain markets, such as Italy, exercise a blanket prohibition on all kinds of gambling sponsorships, endorsements or advertising - whereas other jurisdictions, like the US, are currently experiencing a gambling advertising frenzy, particularly in the sports betting sector. The majority, however, sit somewhere in the middle.
Over the years, the UK, in no small part thanks to its highly regarded Gambling Commission, has been lauded as one of the most effectively regulated world markets. Yet these rulings raise questions around linguistic ambiguities in advertising legislation that are akin more to that of a newly regulated maturing landscape yet to properly find its feet.
In fact, Sri Lanka's charge towards full regulation this year was halted by the nation's Parliamentary Committee for that exact reason; a lack of linguistic clarity around advertising regulations. Elsewhere, Brazil's ongoing headache with celebrity influencer endorsements sent many into an underage-exposure-related panic in the nation this year - a story which relates particularly closely to two of these most recent UK rulings.
Online: A different kettle of fish
As previously mentioned, the singular factor relating these three upheld ASA advertising bans in the UK is the fact that the advertisements were made via social media. One only has to walk past the Emirates, Arsenal's home stadium, and see the giant Betway billboard featuring Thierry Henry to draw the conclusion that what is evidently inappropriate for social media is perfectly acceptable on the street - despite the thousands of young individuals that will pass this billboard every week.
While it would be unreasonable to expect operators to stop utilising the greatest marketing tool of the 21st century, it is almost equally unreasonable to expect them to continue using it without adequate direction.
Observing these particular upheld rulings by the ASA, the phrase 'would have been okay' simply occurs to frequently, further serving to highlight a linguistic grey area that should - in conclusion - simply be either black or white, especially when centred around an issue as paramount as child protection.
Last month, new legislation was passed in the UK to require all licence-holders to uphold CAP Code rules on social media
