Concerns Over Sportsbet Ads on Snapchat (10 Dec 2024)

Michelle: Independent MP Kate Chaney isn't impressed. Good morning to you. Why are you concerned about Sportsbet being on Snapchat?

Kate Chaney: Good morning, Michelle, and it's a pleasure to be here. We go to primary schools and talk to kids about various issues. When I speak to Year Sixes in primary schools in my electorate, they can name multiple sports betting companies. They see the ads everywhere they look. It has become a normalised part of sport for young people. This is just another example of how it is not regulated appropriately. Sports gambling companies are doing everything they can to make young people believe that betting is cool and that it's just part of watching sport.

Michelle: What is it about these filters that particularly concerns you?

Kate Chaney: Well, it seems pretty clear to me that they're aimed at young people. You’ve described them—you can be a horse, you can be a commentator, with Sportsbet promotional material near you. This is clearly aimed at normalising it for young people and making it seem fun and cool, and it's just insidious. It’s everywhere we look. I was part of a committee that did a report into online gambling advertising that recommended a total ban on all ads, treating it like we did tobacco 20 years ago. That hasn’t happened. The government has floated the idea of banning online gambling ads on social media, but that hasn’t happened either. We need action on this because it’s preying on our young people and normalising gambling. It’s not good.

Michelle: These filters aren't available to people under the age of 18. You can see them in other people's stories and they can be sent to you, but you can't use them. And there's no link for under-18s to access the Sportsbet site. Is that a strong enough restriction?

Kate Chaney: I'd say these are not available if you’ve chosen to tell Snapchat that you're under 18. We know there are lots of ways to get around that. There’s very little age verification in place at the moment. Lots of kids under 18 have told Snapchat they’re not under 18. Anyone who shares it can create videos with these filters. It’s very weak regulation. What we heard again and again in the committee hearing is that partial bans don’t work. We see all these creative ways gambling companies get around the weak regulation because they know it works. This is how they build their customer base.

Michelle: So you'd like to see these ads, these filters, withdrawn?

Kate Chaney: We’re in this situation where the call is on Sportsbet to withdraw these filters, and Sportsbet decides out of the goodness of its heart whether or not it will. It’s gone too far. I’d like to see those withdrawn, but really the bigger issue is we need to get rid of gambling advertising off social media platforms and TV as well. The government has not responded to the recommendation in 18 months, despite calling for the inquiry in the first place. Sportsbet should pull these, but the government really needs to listen to the community calls and act so we’re not normalising gambling as part of sport for young people.

Michelle: With the social media ban for under-16s coming and increased age verification, do you think that will make a difference?

Kate Chaney: That’s at least 12 months off, and it’s not clear how it will be enforced or what age verification will be used. There’s still a lot up in the air. What I don’t want to see is that because we’ve got this social media ban, all bets are off, and digital platforms have no obligations to create safe spaces online. The government said the social media ban would be in parallel with other reforms, including a duty of care. But it’s assuming age verification works. There are lots of holes in this. I’m really annoyed the government acted very quickly on the social media ban but has taken 18 months to respond to gambling ad reform recommendations based on solid evidence. The social media ban is one piece of the puzzle. Banning gambling ads has got to be another piece.

Michelle: Kate Chaney, what's the precedent for withdrawing ads?

Kate Chaney: I think it has been done before, but as I said, we’re depending on Sportsbet to decide that this time it’s gone too far and the community outrage is too great. I don’t think that’s an appropriate way to regulate an industry that does huge social harm. We hear so much about the harm gambling causes—domestic violence, mental health issues, relationship breakdowns, financial distress. There are much broader issues. So it’s all very well to say pull this particular ad or promotion, but we’ve got to look at the much deeper, broader issue, which is the normalisation of betting as part of sport for young people.

Michelle: Kate Chaney, thanks for your time today.

Kate Chaney: Thanks very much, Michelle.