I first noticed the ubiquity of the gambling industry while studying at the University of Liverpool. In the student-dominated area of Wavertree, betting shops were pervasive, with a William Hill operating mere paces from my front door.
Imagine my surprise when, having moved hundreds of miles south to London, I was once again confronted with the same neighbour. This time, however, William was flashier and more brash: touting in-your-face slogans and eye-catching ads aimed at any and all passersby. In the early winter morning, with shutters still down, his messages continued to shine bright. Briefly suggesting readers “Pause and Think,” the day’s odds were broadcast before you could say “when the fun stops, stop.”
More relatable, perhaps, was my experience with online betting as an undergrad. As serial football fans, my friends and I often placed accumulator bets, or “accas,” on one or multiple games each week. While high-stakes bets never appealed to me, others put down sums well beyond their means, with at least one person I knew having to seek help for gambling addiction. Unfortunately, this is not uncommon, and university can quickly become an isolating space for those who start to rack up gambling debt.
In many ways, students make the ideal consumer for companies to target. Traditionally not the richest bunch, they nevertheless make up for it with their aversion to frugality. Often granted a new lease of freedom from parental supervision, and with more money at their personal discretion than ever before, undergraduates in particular may not always spend wisely. Rarely, too, are students confined to nine-to-five drudgery, increasing their potential exposure to advertising on TV, on the high street, and online.
The responsibility to regulate the gambling industry, and by extension our consumer protections, lies with the 2005 Gambling Act. A hefty piece of legislation, it nonetheless lacks the requisite teeth needed to enforce industry standards.
Worse still, it does not even provide a cogent set of standards amenable to our current digital age.
Advertising and the Gambling Act
In his book Jackpot: How Gambling Conquered Britain, journalist Rob Davies devotes a full chapter to gambling ads in Britain. This is a fledgling sector when one considers it was the 2005 Gambling Act that first allowed industry go-tos like William Hill to advertise on television.
Unsurprisingly, Davies’ analysis finds that TV is hardly the rendezvous between corporation and customer it once was. Instead, he writes, “80p of every pound” on advertising is now spent on the internet.
In this fact lies a glaring weakness in the Gambling Act: it is an anachronism.
Take, for example, s.46 of the Act, which prohibits “bringing to the attention of a child or young person information about gambling” in a way that encourages them to gamble. A violation of this clause may have been easy to police in 2005.
Now, however, a grey area has developed, facilitated by platforms that young people frequent but that are littered with gambling ads. This is especially pertinent given that the nation’s student body is, increasingly, one whose formative years occurred after 2007–the year the iPhone was launched–in an era dominated by these platforms.
Indeed, in 2022 two-thirds of 11-16 year olds were exposed to these online ads (and a similar proportion offline). Surely the primary piece of legislation we have on this issue should do more than this?
Most galling is the fact that Britain is an outlier in its regulatory practices. Belgium and Italy have blanket bans on all forms of advertising in this sector, and other European nations operate much tighter controls than we do on this side of the Channel. There is, therefore, a blueprint for a more responsible and progressive approach to regulation in this area. The push for reform, however, remains stalled.
Students at risk
Despite my anecdotal experiences and the current regulatory outlay of the gambling industry, it is fair to ask: do students have a personal stake in curbing current trends? After all, gambling amongst 18 to 24 year olds is more often done for fun–as opposed to the draw of winning big money–when compared with other demographics.
The problem is, students also have a lot to lose. Or, more accurately, not much they can lose. While gambling addiction is quickly becoming a public health crisis, it is students who sit at its heart. Focusing on undergraduates in particular, research has shown that a proclivity for risk and increased stress while studying heighten the chances of problematic gambling among students.
The same research has also evidenced at-risk individuals in two communities that UCL should be especially alert to: those from economically disadvantaged backgrounds and international students.
Concerningly, positive correlations have been found between levels of problematic gambling and access to financial hardship funds. Furthermore, early evidence suggests that students studying abroad are at increased risk of problematic gambling while away from home. Given UCL’s position as “London’s Global University,” the potential ramifications for our student body are obvious. Debt, isolation, and crippling mental health issues–all while one is far from home–cannot be justified.
An annual survey by the Young Gamers and Gamblers Education Trust–better known as Ygam–last year recorded that nearly a quarter of respondents had friends who struggled to pay for bills due to patterns of gambling. Given the bombardment of ads on their phones, during sports broadcasts, and on the high street, the chance that these high-risk students will subsequently rein in this behaviour is low. In fact, data-driven gambling ads online target with greater intensity those who already gamble, creating a vicious cycle.
What students can do
In February, the Students’ Union passed UP2508, a policy proposal that mandated it join the Coalition to End Gambling Ads (CEGA). Aside from publicly supporting the coalition’s aims, what this means in practice is up to the Union, and by extension, us as a student body.
Next year a new group of officers will be tasked with defining this, and I would urge anyone reading to contribute to that discussion. As students at a renowned institution like UCL, we should take the lead in this area, lending intellectual and moral weight to an issue that is affecting those both within our community and without.