In the summer of 2021, Luke Ashton, a husband and father-of-two from Leicester, England, took his own life, writes Grace Graham-Taylor.
Unbeknown to his family, in the preceding months Ashton had relapsed into a debilitating gambling addiction, a problem he had struggled with since 2018 but had largely managed to conquer — until the COVID 19 pandemic hit, and the lure of free-bet offers became impossible to resist.
Though far from an isolated case, Ashton’s death made history as the first in which a gambling firm was formally named at a coroner’s inquest.
In a verdict presented in 2023, coroner Ivan Cartwright lambasted Betfair, a subsidiary of Flutter Entertainment, for failing to meaningfully intervene in Ashton’s play, despite claiming to use an algorithm to protect vulnerable users.
As one of the so-called ‘sin industries’, the gambling industry has long had to defend itself against charges of exploitation and customer-related harm.
Leading providers are clearly aware of their responsibility to protect players, as shown by their commitment, at least in principle, to ensure safe gambling behaviour on their platforms.
Yet this commitment does not always translate into practice.
Predatory Marketing
As the explosion of online betting sees industry revenues continue to soar, pressure is mounting on leading firms to prove that they are not profiting at the expense of their most vulnerable players.
In particular, predatory marketing practices and insubstantial safety measures need to be examined, if the industry is to foster trust amongst its user base and from the governments that regulate it.
Problem gambling, or ‘gambling disorder’, is statistically low amongst players.
According to a recent World Health Organisation review, only 1.2 percent of people globally report having a gambling problem, despite around half of all adults surveyed admitting to partaking in gambling at least once in the previous year.
However, problem gamblers are also the industry’s most profitable market, accounting for 60 percent of net losses in games. Controlling problem gambling thus presents firms with an uncomfortable conflict of interest.
In theory, at-risk customers using online betting services should be easier to identify, due to the vast amounts of data collected on them by gambling services. In the wake of Ashton’s death, Flutter, for instance, claims to have upped its predictive safer gambling model to include 370 behavioural factors, which would trigger an intervention if activated.
Multiple Failures
However, multiple failures by industry leaders to intercede in cases where customers are betting large sums suggests that current safety measures are inadequate or poorly enforced.
In the past three years, 888 Holdings, Betway, William Hill, and Ceasers Entertainment have all been subject to fines in excess of £9 million pounds for activities relating to breaches of social responsibility.
These have included, in the case of William Hill, a record-breaking fine of £19.2 million for allowing one customer to open a new account and spend £23,000 in 20 minutes without any checks, among other harms.
The failings of industry leaders to intervene in every case of problem gambling might be more forgivable, were it not for the intense focus and financial power it directs towards encouraging users to spend.
Pressure
This problem is particularly prevalent in the UK, which, unlike many other European countries, places almost no restrictions on gambling marketing.
Statistics published by the UK Gambling Commission suggest that around 10 percent of industry revenue is spent on marketing to consumers.
Multiple studies suggest that gambling addicts are particularly susceptible to gambling marketing. Yet marketing campaigns by gambling operators are often sent out indiscriminately, indirectly encouraging struggling players to lapse further into their addiction.
One British gambler interviewed for a study on addiction commented: “Gambling adverts are everywhere! You can’t escape them. They are on daytime TV and throughout the football and other sports on commercial channels.
“It is also inescapable when you are on the internet and social media. It’s on my Twitter feed as promoted ads. It’s been normalised and the industry are always coming up with new ways to suck people in.”
As another interviewee, whose mother struggles with gambling addiction, put it: “Gambling companies say please play responsibly even though we’ll do everything we can to make damn sure you don’t’!”
Given the pressure that the industry exerts on its customers, one naturally wonders whether its attempts to curb problem gambling are sincere.
If gambling companies want to avoid further crackdowns and government intervention, such as that outlined in the UK’s recent White Paper, they will have to do more to prove that they are working to prevent harm.
