Digital Marketing, Television
COMPLAINT NUMBER 18/036
COMPLAINANT J. Witehira, J. Layland and O.
ADVERTISER Jackpot City ADVERTISEMENT Digital Marketing, Television DATE OF MEETING 29 January 2018
OUTCOME No Grounds to Proceed
Advertisement: The television advertisement for Jackpot City promoted online slots games. The advertisement said, in part "play for free at jackpotcity.net and get treated as a VIP 24/7... play today at jackpotcity.net."
The Chair ruled there were no grounds for the complaint to proceed.
Complainant, J Witehira, said: "...this ad being screened all over my t.v. at least once every couple hours in the evening past 7.30pm right through till after midnight.
While I don't have anything against playing the slot machines myself nor do I have a gambling habit, but ... I am very aware at how much money just one person can put into the machines in just a small space of time. That money 9/10 would have been rent or food money or for something they needed. The amount of times and money I would do efpos cashouts for the same person wouldn't make any sense to me. They end up getting more money out of their accounts than the jackpot had in it. It was senseless but unfortunately that's the addiction. And so many families/marriges/businesses etc are being destroyed from gambling.
So when I see online gambling being broadcasted all over t.v. making it even more easier, accessible and convenient for people to put their good hard earned wages that their families need for the roof over their heads and food for their mouths to just waste on their gambling addiction.
This advertisement should not be glorified and sold viewers in their private home. I am disgusted to see it glorified and made to look like a VIP outing when all it truley is is robbing people of their money ultimately their livelihood and happiness.
We don't see cigarettes being advertised and glorified, we do see alcohol being advertised but the focus is mainly around either value for money or branding. Never really glorified drinking binges.
So why am I seeing online gambling advertised and glorified and so many times in one night???
I want to see this taken down as this ad is only enabling the gamblers addiction to feed those machines money which is taking from their children's mouths which is adding to New Zealand's poverty rate.
There is no need to broadcast such rubbish when there is more than enough machines in every pub, bar and casino to go round,, which are also causing damage.
I am speaking for the ones who are suffering first hand the losses and the gamblers themselves. Ultimately this is not going to end well, please take it down."
Duplicate Complainants J. Layland and O. Duthie shared similar views that the advertisement glamorised and encouraged gambling.
The relevant provisions were Code for Advertising Gaming and Gambling - Principle
1, Principle 2;
The Chair acknowledged the genuine concerns of the Complainants the advertisement encouraged and glamorised gambling and the costs associated with gambling addiction.
As a self-regulatory organisation, the Advertising Standards Authority's jurisdiction is limited to the content and placement of advertisements and compliance with the Advertising Codes of Practice. The Chair said the Advertising Standards Authority could only operate within the parameters of the Advertising Codes and the Advertiser was promoting a legal product at an age appropriate time.
The Chair noted the television advertisement for the 'jackpotcity.net' website clearly referred to 'playing for free'. The Chair noted J. Witehira's concern about being treated as a "VIP". She said while this could be a reference to a casino experience, the wording contained a level of hyperbole in the context of a website where it was free to play the games.
The Chair said the free games promoted in the advertisement were clearly themed on casino slot machines, but this did not breach the requirement for a high standard of social responsibility.
The Chair said the advertisement was not in breach of the Code for Advertising Gaming and
Gambling and had been prepared with a high standard of social responsibility. Therefore, the Chair ruled the complaints had no grounds to proceed.
Chair's Ruling: Complaint No Grounds to Proceed