Blurred lines: New York not happy with integration of betting content into sports programming
The world of sports betting advertising is evolving at an incredible pace, and regulators in New York are raising concerns about how this progression is impacting compliance with existing rules.
To address these issues, the New York State Gaming Commission (NYSGC) recently held a roundtable discussion with representatives from licensed sportsbook operators. At the heart of the debate is the increasing integration of betting content into sports programming, which some argue blurs the line between factual information and promotional material.
The fine line between content and advertising
Brian O’Dwyer, chair of the NYSGC, opened the discussion by highlighting his growing concerns about the nature of sports betting content on programming. “These days, I find myself paying far more attention to the advertising on sports networks than I do sports itself,” he commented, his point reflecting a broader unease around how betting-related content is presented to audiences.
Operators defended their approach, arguing that integrating betting information into sports coverage enhances the viewer experience. Cory Fox, senior vice president of public policy and sustainability at FanDuel, explained: “A lot of the sports betting operators are attempting to have integrations with sports programming … where we are woven into the fabric of how folks are describing a game because those betting really enjoy that kind of content.” However, he acknowledged that distinguishing between an advertisement and an integration can be challenging.
O’Dwyer expressed scepticism about whether these integrations always comply with state regulations, which require responsible gambling messages in all advertisements. “I think the industry has grown, and as we see … many more sports programs integrating [betting content], I’m seeing things that I consider to be very close to non-compliance, if not over [the line],” he said. O’Dwyer specifically pointed to instances where odds or point spreads are broadcast without disclaimers or helpline information, which he believes should trigger regulatory requirements.
Operators push back on ad definitions
Representatives from sportsbook operators argued that not all betting-related content should be classified as advertising. Elliot Kelly, senior corporate counsel for DraftKings, explained: “I think the important aspect of that is it’s much more of a citation of source … Without providing where those odds come from, it lacks that credibility that the odds being provided are legitimate.” “He suggested that presenting odds as factual information does not necessarily equate to a call to action.
Sarah Brennan, vice president of compliance for BetMGM, echoed this sentiment. “We look at it as, is this a fact? Are we presenting the audience with a fact, or are we trying to engage the audience in a call to action to come wager with us with an inducement?” she said. According to Brennan, only direct calls to action should require disclaimers under current regulations.
Despite these arguments, O’Dwyer remained firm in his stance that some integrations may already violate advertising rules. “When I’m listening and I hear particularly odds are being disseminated … that appears, frankly to me to trigger our regulations in terms of disclaimers and the helpline,” he said.
National vs local helpline numbers: A point of contention
Another contentious issue discussed during the roundtable was whether operators should be allowed to use a national problem gambling hotline number as opposed to New York’s local HOPEline in advertisements. Operators argued that using a single national number would simplify compliance and still provide effective support for those seeking help.
However, Rebecca Cooper from New York’s Office of Addiction Services and Supports raised concerns about this approach, emphasising that ensuring immediate access to help is critical and suggested that local hotlines may better serve this purpose.
The discussion highlighted an ongoing tension between operators seeking flexibility in their advertising practices and regulators striving to protect consumers. As the industry continues to evolve, finding common ground on these issues will likely remain a challenge.
