Griffiths, MD

English

Nottingham Trent Institutional Repository (IRep)

world online gambling june 2010offline gambling environments butthese are based on observationalanecdotes rather than empiricalresearch. For instance, thefrequency of bonuses in offlinegambling environments varies -depending the establishment - butcan occur hourly, daily, weekly orseasonally. Such bonuses are oftenused to entice the consumer inseveral retail environments.Whatmakes them especially appealing ina gambling environment are theobvious similarities of thestructural characteristics of suchbonuses and gambling events ingeneral - risk, uncertainty, interval-ratio reinforcement etc.Furthermore, the appeal isstrengthened since gamblers feelthey are ‘getting something fornothing’.Two forms of bonusesThere is a distinction between twofundamentally different forms ofbonuses – the ‘general bonus’ andthe ‘proportional bonus’. Thesedifferent types of bonuses mayhave different implications interms of social responsibility.General bonuses are those offersthat are provided irrespective ofthe type of player - for example, anoccasional gambler is as equallyentitled to the bonus as a ‘heavy’gambler. Proportional bonuses arethose offers that depend on howlong and/or frequently the playergambles with a particular gamingestablishment. This means that‘heavy’ gamblers would receivedisproportionately more bonusesthan an irregular player. Given thata significant proportion of the‘heaviest’ gamblers - sometimesreferred to as ‘VIP gamblers’ - maybe problem gamblers, it raisesquestions whether rewardingpeople the more they spend is themost socially responsible strategy.In relation to the use ofpromotional bonuses, two basicissues arise. The first one iswhether online gaming companiesshould offer bonuses. They can beperceived as ideologicallyincompatible with being sociallyresponsible. The second is whethersome types of bonuses are lesssocially responsible than others. Inthe absence of empirical evidence,it could be argued that generalbonuses, which target potentialadult online gamblers irrespectiveof play frequency and/or type, areacceptable within online gamingenvironments that have a goodsocial responsibility infrastructure.However, bonuses that reward thebiggest spenders could be arguedto be much less sociallyresponsible. Although this model iswell accepted in most commercialenvironments (i.e. loyalty rewardschemes), gambling is acommercial activity that can resultin problems for the heaviestgamblers.Applying these views topromotional bonuses in onlinegaming environments would meanthat some bonuses appeargenerally acceptable from a socialresponsibility perspective (forexample, a $10 token, 100%welcome bonuses and possibly re-activation offers) whereas othersmay be considered less sociallyresponsible and potentiallyexploitative (retention offers andVIP offers). It may be the case thatother socially responsible measuresimplemented by an online gamingcompany (such as the use of abehavioural tracking tool likePlayScan) may help mitigate thepotential exploitation of problemgamblers.Mark D. Griffiths ProfessorInternational Gaming Research UnitNottingham Trent Universitymark.griffiths@ntu.ac.ukADS12Many promotions includewelcome bonuses, initial depositbonuses, retention bonuses, re-activation of account bonuses andVIP bonuses. The issue here is towhat extent the use of promotional‘hooks’ to generate new custom ormaintain repeat patronage can beregarded as a socially responsiblestrategy. Previous writings aboutadvertising and marketing from asocial responsibility perspectivehave noted that it is entirelyappropriate for the gamingindustry to advertise and markettheir products as long as it comlieswith relevant codes, is fact-based,does not oversell winning, and isnot aimed at - or features - minors.In gambling, there is a fine linebetween customer enhancementand customer exploitation,particularly when it comes tofacilitating new clientele and repeatpatronage. Given the politicalsensitivities around theliberalisation of gambling, theperception of what others thinkabout a particular practice aresometimes given more weight thanwhat it actually means in practice.However, irrespective of whethersomething is introduced in asocially responsible way and/orintroduced into an environmentwith an embedded sociallyresponsible infrastructure, there isalways the possibility of a ‘PR owngoal’ that may do more financialdamage in the long run to theonline gaming operator.There are some academic writingson the use of bonus promotions inOnline ads and the promotionof responsible gamblingMany online gaming sites use awide variety of promotions as a wayof attracting new customers andgenerating repeat patronage. MarkGriffiths, Professor at NottinghamTrent University, discusses whethersuch promotions are sociallyresponsible.

Online ads and the promotion of responsible gambling

Abstract

Similar works

Full text

Available Versions

Nottingham Trent Institutional Repository (IRep)