Advertising Standards Bureau Review of Operations 2016 2016 Review of operations_WEB | Page 60

The Board also determined that using language
such as being ‘up for the challenge’ is suggestive of
taking a chance rather than a promise of winning.
•
The Board dismissed a complaint about an
advertisement on TV and Cinema which
contains a montage of athletes competing
and concludes with ‘Ladbrokes. Up for
the Challenge. Since 1886’ on screen
(Ladbroke.com.au –0370/16 and 0371/16).
In the Board’s view advertising for wagering
products or services which suggest that if you do
your research you may increase your luck, does not
imply a promise of winning.
•
•
The Board dismissed a complaint about a pay
TV advertisement which shows three men
discussing whether a footballer will score
based on his height vs a defender who uses a
hair gel that will get in their eyes and make it
hard for them to defend (Unibet – 0475/16).
The Board dismissed a complaint about a
television advertisement which featured a
man commenting on a football match and
noting that the soccer referee is on a ‘short
Excessive participation
Section 2.8 of the Wagering Code states:
Advertising or Marketing Communication for a
Wagering Product or Service must not portray,
condone or encourage excessive participation in
wagering activities.
In 2016 the Board upheld complaints against two
advertisements under this section.
The Board determined that advertising which
suggested that wagering is a behaviour that needs
to be hidden and that isolates someone from
their family shows wagering taking precedence
in someone’s life, and that this behaviour
is an example of excessive participation in
wagering activities.
•
The Board determined that showing excessive
participation in a wagering activity can take
place in a short amount of time and that an
advertisement does not need to suggest this
participation is of long-standing for it to breach
this section of the Code.
•
The Board upheld a complaint about a
television advertisement which depicted
a man reminiscing about a boys’ weekend
which shows the men looking at live and
replay racing on a wagering app while
ignoring other activities such as food cooking
(Tabcorp – 0447/16).
For more information see the Wagering
advertising determination summary.
The Board upheld a complaint about a
television advertisement which depicted a
man hiding from his family under a table and
accessing a wagering website on his phone
(Lottoland – 0552/16).
list’ for being appointed for the final of the
tournament. As a consequence, the gamblers
conclude they might ‘beat the odds’ by
predicting the decisions of the referee (Unibet
– 0474/16).
58
Advertising Standards Bureau