By EUGENIO BUCCI*
It's time to end betting advertising.
Online betting houses are winning all over. Brazil has given in: it has turned its children, teenagers and young people into gambling assets and given them as a gift to cybercroupiers, the betting barons. It is not the government that has lost its way alone, it is not the Legislature that has run out of chips, it is not the Judiciary that has fallen asleep on the job, it is not society that has allowed itself to be deceived – everyone together has made mistakes and continues to make them. At this point, the entire country has realized the damage and is asking itself: is there any way to undo the blunder that was made?
The measures that paved the way for virtual casinos came gradually, in surreptitious waves. The steps followed one another in a minuet between thievery and ineptitude, until suddenly it became clear: digital roulette has swallowed up the nation, in a public health calamity sprinkled with open-air money laundering. Some of the parliamentarians who voted in favor of the perks now declare that they regret it. Believe it or not. The situation is bad, so bad that it makes the old animal game seem like a pastime for altar boys – a little saint.
The scale of the tragedy is brutal. Among the beneficiaries of Bolsa Família, it is estimated that five million are gambling three billion reais per month, which corresponds to 21% of the public money invested in the program. In the global online gaming market, Brazil ranks third: it moves around 120 billion reais per year, something like 1% of the GDP, behind only England and the United States. Analysts estimate that the number will grow rapidly.
While some people win big, the new generations lose everything. In a report by Victória Ribeiro, the newspaper The State of S. Paul showed, in this Sunday's edition, that teenagers resort to loan sharks to pay for their addiction. Psychiatrists report that, at this age, the brain's defenses against impulses are not yet formed, which leaves younger clients more vulnerable. According to experts, gambling, for this group, can be as addictive as crack.
What should be done? A first step, among so many harebrained, cynical or unfeasible proposals, would be to ban online gambling advertisements. This measure may be interpreted as censorship, but it is merely sensible and regular. Banning commercial advertising does not in any way violate freedom of expression. The right to advertise does not have the status of a fundamental guarantee; it is merely a complement, an accessory to commercial activity.
Advertising is a license for merchants to advertise their goods, and this license has its limits managed in the routine of any democratic society. Freedom of expression and commercial advertising are not to be confused or equivalent; they are two matters as distinct as the right to come and go (a fundamental guarantee) and the prohibition of driving in the wrong direction (an ordinary traffic rule).
Several countries, including Brazil, have restricted tobacco and alcohol advertising campaigns without harming people’s freedom. Preventing someone from advertising firearms to children does not make society less democratic. On the other hand, allowing “betting” ads to be shown to teenagers does not make a society freer – it makes it sicker.
It's time to put an end to advertising by online bookmakers. Last Saturday, the newspaper The State of S. Paul defended this measure in an editorial (“Paternalism does not solve the problem of 'bets'”). The recommendation was expressed in precise language: “the only path to follow immediately is the total prohibition of advertising on these betting sites, just as was done with alcoholic beverages and cigarettes”.
What is currently on the air is unacceptable. Olympic champions and soccer idols appear on prime-time TV to promote betting houses, in campaigns that monopolize sports programming. Is this a good role for renowned athletes? Are they acting correctly? By lending their image to this type of harassment, are they improving the lives of their fans? Of course not.
In 1976, soccer player Gerson, who was a standout on the 1970 Brazilian national team alongside Pelé and Tostão, starred in a promotional piece for Vila Rica cigarettes, manufactured by J. Reynolds. Since Vila Rica was a more affordable product than its competitors, the star said he preferred the brand because he liked to “take advantage of everything.” The phrase became synonymous with a lack of ethics and was given the name “Gérson’s Law.” Gerson himself suffered greatly because of this, more than he deserved.
Now, their fellow professionals are causing much worse harm. And that's not all. In addition to dragging teenagers into addiction, gambling companies, according to the editorial of The State of S. Paul, still offer as a bonus “an obvious form of money laundering for organized crime”. The “betting” business hijacks the future of young people and, on top of that, clogs the media with harmful ads. Everything has become very difficult. There is no way to free people from the compulsion to bet, but, with abusive advertising, at least with that, we can still find a way.
* Eugene Bucci He is a professor at the School of Communications and Arts at USP. Author, among other books, of Uncertainty, an essay: how we think about the idea that disorients us (and orients the digital world) (authentic). [https://amzn.to/3SytDKl]
Originally published in the newspaper The State of S. Paul.
the earth is round there is thanks to our readers and supporters.
Help us keep this idea going.
CONTRIBUTE
