Will the government’s online gambling advertising legislation ever eventuate? Don’t bet on it
- Written by David Rowe, Emeritus Professor of Cultural Research, Institute for Culture and Society, Western Sydney University
As the next federal election came into view before the summer break, concern increased that Labor wouldn’t be honouring its commitment to introduce new restrictions[1] on online (especially sport) gambling advertising during the current parliamentary sitting.
Those fears[2] were well-founded, despite pressure from many sides[3] and broad bipartisan political support[4].
The Greens made a last-ditch attempt[5] to cooperate with the government to pass some reforms in the February 2025 sitting, but were rebuffed.
Instead, Communications Minister Michelle Rowland blamed the delay[6] on the complexity of advertising reform and the need to continue consultation.
This is despite a House of Representatives inquiry[7] into the harmful impacts of online gambling, led by the late Labor MP Peta Murphy, concluding in June 2023.
In the meantime, much less well-researched but wider-ranging[8] legislation banning children under 16 from using social media was introduced and passed[9] in just eight days in November 2024.
There are both deep historical and immediate political reasons why this legislation has been bogged down.
A nation of sporting gamblers
Professional sport in Australia has an inglorious history of promoting unhealthy[10] goods and services, including cigarettes, sugary drinks, fast food, alcohol and gambling[11].
Television and, later, online advertisements[12] have been particularly effective vehicles for connecting sport gambling with potential consumers.
This has prompted widespread objections to the health and social consequences[13] and intrusiveness[14] of gambling advertising.
There is convincing evidence that Australia’s world-leading[15] per capita expenditure on gambling and the integral role of sport gambling ads cause harm[16] to a considerable number of people, families and communities.
Such harm[17] includes negative effects on relationships, health, psychological wellbeing, finances, work and study.
The gamblification of sport
Although sport comes third among the main areas of gambling[18] in Australia, it is by far the most prominent, especially in homes.
Read more: Pokies? Lotto? Sports betting? Which forms of problem gambling affect Australians the most?[19]
The so-called gamblification of sport[20], accelerated by digitisation, normalises the concept of betting odds[21] among children and young people.
Sport and media’s enthusiasm for gambling money has provoked strong pushback over its negative social consequences, with mounting public pressure[22] for greater controls on gambling advertising.
A recent poll[23] found about 72% of those surveyed wanted to ban online gambling ads, while another of AFL[24] fans reported 76% supported television and radio ad bans.
The response of and to the Murphy Report
The House of Representatives Standing Committee on Social Policy and Legal Affairs was charged with investigating online gambling and its impacts.
It made 31 recommendations, with rare cross-party support, in its “you win some, you lose more[25]” report (which was not only about sport).
Contrary to most public debate and media reporting, it did not formally recommend a blanket ban[26] on all gambling advertising. Its terms of reference only covered online gambling.
But Murphy’s foreword – calling for a “phased, comprehensive ban on all gambling advertising on all media; broadcast and online, that leaves no room for circumvention” – caught the most attention.
The main recommendation was for a three-year, four-phase ban on all forms of online gambling advertising. Dedicated racing channels and programming were exempted and small community radio broadcasters given extra time to comply.
After further consultation lasting almost 18 months, it’s clear this calibrated proposal is not favoured by the government.
Journalists were backgrounded about a watered down law[27] capping ads for gambling at two per hour per TV channel before 10pm, and banning them for an hour either side of a live sport event. A blanket ban would apply only to betting ads on social media and other digital platforms.
Yet even these more modest reforms did not proceed as anticipated.
The reason, it has been widely reported, was heavy lobbying[28] by the sport, media and gambling industries.
High-stakes horse trading
The privileged access[29] to government gained by these sectional interests[30] has had a powerful impact on gambling legislation.
The Coalition of Major Professional and Participation Sports has continually resisted[31] tightening regulations on sport sponsorship and gambling ads.
It claims their reduction or loss would damage the financial viability of its members and their support for grassroots sport[32].
However, Australia’s major sports leagues derive significant gambling revenue from direct sources (sponsorship, product fees) and indirectly from the value of media rights.
The AFL and NRL generated cumulative revenues of $1.06 billion[33] and $701 million[34] respectively in 2023.
So while sport leagues would have less capacity to monetise their media rights if gambling ads were reduced, it would neither threaten professional sport in general nor seriously jeopardise funding of junior participation.
Follow the money
An Australian Communications and Media Authority report discovered capital city free-to-air television featured 1,381 gambling spots per day[35] between May 2022 and April 2023.
Gambling companies spent $162 million on free-to-air television advertising during this period, not including further investment on subscription platforms.
As free-to-air commercial TV is already losing advertising income to digital media platforms, restrictions on this lucrative advertiser category would not be as easily absorbed today as the tobacco advertising bans[36] in the 1970s.
This is why sports and their media and betting partners are fighting so hard against the legislation.
And all this capital flowing to and through sport, gambling, and media has created the potential to inflict political harm on gambling reforming governments[37].
Negotiations[38] behind closed doors[39] can easily break out into public campaigns, akin to the infamous “axe the (carbon) tax[40]” agitation, if powerful organisations are not satisfied.
Gambling and the young voter
Sport gambling ads in Australia have especially targeted young men[41] in a jocular larrikin style. But young women are now also being induced[42] to gamble in greater numbers.
Read more: 9 out of 10 Australian sports bettors are men. Here’s why that might change[43]
Those who want curbs on sport gambling advertisements have been cast by some as “wowsers” and “puritans”[44].
State intervention in the sport-media-gambling nexus[45] may provoke a backlash that working-class men are under attack for engaging in their favourite pastimes.
Like the latest reforms to sport TV anti-siphoning laws[46], new policies are the product of high-stakes horse trading between nervous governments and pressure groups with manifestly variable degrees of influence.
As in the gambling world, evidence-based policy[47] can confront very uneven odds.
References
- ^ new restrictions (www.afr.com)
- ^ Those fears (www.afr.com)
- ^ many sides (www.canberratimes.com.au)
- ^ political support (www.smh.com.au)
- ^ last-ditch attempt (www.abc.net.au)
- ^ delay (www.theguardian.com)
- ^ House of Representatives inquiry (www.aph.gov.au)
- ^ well-researched but wider-ranging (www.openforum.com.au)
- ^ introduced and passed (www.aph.gov.au)
- ^ unhealthy (bmcpublichealth.biomedcentral.com)
- ^ gambling (www.penguin.com.au)
- ^ advertisements (www.bbc.com)
- ^ health and social consequences (bmcpublichealth.biomedcentral.com)
- ^ intrusiveness (www.smh.com.au)
- ^ world-leading (www.abc.net.au)
- ^ cause harm (grattan.edu.au)
- ^ harm (aifs.gov.au)
- ^ main areas of gambling (www.jacarandafinance.com.au)
- ^ Pokies? Lotto? Sports betting? Which forms of problem gambling affect Australians the most? (theconversation.com)
- ^ gamblification of sport (www.tandfonline.com)
- ^ normalises the concept of betting odds (www.theage.com.au)
- ^ public pressure (newshub.medianet.com.au)
- ^ poll (www.abc.net.au)
- ^ AFL (www.theguardian.com)
- ^ you win some, you lose more (parlinfo.aph.gov.au)
- ^ blanket ban (www.abc.net.au)
- ^ watered down law (www.smh.com.au)
- ^ lobbying (theconversation.com)
- ^ privileged access (www.abc.net.au)
- ^ sectional interests (www.davidpocock.com.au)
- ^ continually resisted (www.theguardian.com)
- ^ their support for grassroots sport (www.3aw.com.au)
- ^ $1.06 billion (www.afl.com.au)
- ^ $701 million (www.nrl.com)
- ^ 1,381 gambling spots per day (www.theguardian.com)
- ^ tobacco advertising bans (www.tobaccoinaustralia.org.au)
- ^ gambling reforming governments (www.crikey.com.au)
- ^ Negotiations (www.afr.com)
- ^ closed doors (www.theguardian.com)
- ^ axe the (carbon) tax (theconversation.com)
- ^ young men (www.abc.net.au)
- ^ now also being induced (theconversation.com)
- ^ 9 out of 10 Australian sports bettors are men. Here’s why that might change (theconversation.com)
- ^ “wowsers” and “puritans” (www.dailytelegraph.com.au)
- ^ nexus (bookstore.emerald.com)
- ^ sport TV anti-siphoning laws (theconversation.com)
- ^ evidence-based policy (pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov)
Authors: David Rowe, Emeritus Professor of Cultural Research, Institute for Culture and Society, Western Sydney University
