Home NewsMarketing The word normalisation does not have a bad connotation

The word normalisation does not have a bad connotation

33 views 6 minutes read

Jon Bruford discusses if gambling is becoming normalised within our society, and what the advertising industry can do to address the much-debated topic of advertising.

It was 1993 when I first heard “email”. I worked at my first ever publisher. As we couldn’t get the SyQuest drives (can anyone remember them?) to us in time for printing, my editor said that “we will have to email it and hope nobody phones up at night.” My editor told me that we would have to ask them to send us a SyQuest drive (remember those?) or something similar in order to be able to publish the issue.

Say that again please, and get them where?

“Email it.”

What the heck does it mean?

It’s everywhere, and everyone knows what it is. What about the first time? He looked like he was drunk. It has become standard.

The term “normalisation” has become a popular one, and is often used in relation to gambling. The gambling industry has become normalized, and it is now a part of everyday life. Of course, it’s not used to a positive effect.

What does this mean? What does it mean?

You’ll usually find something negative. Vaping is also used to describe smoking, and it has become more popular in the past few years. It’s not that I am equating them, but they are completely different. The only thing in common is the addiction to nicotine.

Integrated into our Culture

The UK banned tobacco advertisements in 2003. In 2007, a smoking ban was implemented in the workplace, effectively preventing pubs from allowing smokers. Now you can’t have any tobacco displayed for sale.

It is easy to understand and simple how effective the crusade was. Remove the visibility routes, deprive the smoke of oxygen, and as the proponents of smoking die and the new generation grows, the issue of smoking will no longer be relevant.

The Conversation published an article a few years ago that said sports are being used as a way to normalise betting and should be treated in the same manner as smoking. It was stated in the article that you’re “four times as likely” to see gambling ads during sports than other programs if you watched sports on television.

Yes, you’re more likely to be exposed to a beer ad and/or sponsorship. The perceived relevance to the advertiser of the target audience is what determines this. It’s no coincidence that you may notice more bingo and chocolate commercials when watching soap operas.

The reason you can’t denormalize gambling the same as smoking, is simple. Our language already includes it. Every day, we use it in our conversations. Non-gamblers use every day .

What happened to get it here?

The Guardian also publishes articles about the favorites to win various prizes. Imagine the plot devices of early movies, such as “parley”.

It’s not gambling. I’m sure. They might be tempted to (fan)duel then conference when they hear that…I’ll go get my coat. It’s an unusual term that has only two possible contexts. The first is gambling and the second is a very successful Hollywood film franchise.

It’s a common phrase to ask, “What’s the chance of this happening?” People don’t really want to know the probability, they just use it as a way of expressing themselves. It’s furniture. There’s nothing there but .

Gambling is very normal and has been so for many years.

Alan Hardacre, who has extensive knowledge of both the tobacco and gambling industries, was my first choice to ask about it. He wears many hats, and his lanyard says he’s a leader in public affairs.

He said that “normalising is essentially establishing a marketplace.” You’re trying establish something that is not a part of the culture or current offering. It’s a matter of selling an activity to people as a pastime.

If you want to denormalise online gambling you have to determine the damage that is being caused, and how that harm is being perpetrated, before creating a plan to attack the various elements that cause that harm.

Balance is the key

Advertising is a big part of what’s wrong with the image online gambling has. The advertising is often very effective but the quantity of it that matters.

Hardacre calls it “carpet-bombing”. This carpet bombing, which is, by this definition, as simple as trying establish a new market, may not have existed before, creates pushback. We will be regulated if we do not monitor the situation ourselves.

The Betting and Gaming Council, for example, can be praised for their ban on whistles-to-whistles. It’s quite another to find out that betting logos were seen in a football match 37 times in a minute .

The gambling industry must do better and more for all parties involved when a club takes the sponsorship cheque to the bank without doing any due diligence. Clubs sell advertising on pitchside digital boards that are broadcast worldwide. The Premier League, by far, is the most watched sports league. After all, they just want to make money.

Our trade associations should work together to create an agreement that limits external advertising, i.e. anything beyond your website and signed up player communications.

We are witnessing real pushback. While regulators listen to our concerns, we’re all thrilled about new markets. These complaints will certainly influence future market regulations.

Hardacre summarizes that “in small amounts, none of these would be offensive. But in absolute excess, they are served it becomes offensive”.

Jon Bruford is a gambling expert who has worked in the industry for more than 17 years. He was previously managing editor at Casino International, and is currently publishing director with Kate Chambers, and Greg Saint. His large dog has a sensitive digestive system. He spends most of his time in the free-time learning how to remove stains.

You may also like

About Us

On iGamingWorld, we provide in-depth analysis, the latest news and opinions from famous people of the gaming industry.

Featured Posts