Jump to content

Greedy Celebrities


Davyo
 Share

Recommended Posts

  • Replies 67
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Being devil’s advocate, why should gambling adverts be banned?

We have a growing tendency in this country to take a view that legislation is the answer to resolving our issues.  I don’t for a second try to trivialise the impact that problem gambling does and can have, but with the rate of problem gambling in this country being 0.7% of the population, but with 46% of the population gambling within the last 4 weeks (Gambling Commission statistics) why would we want to implement legislation because of a tiny minority?

Gambling is evidently (in the literal sense of that word) enjoyed by a very big percentage of the population without it being an issue, so why should that industry not be allowed to advertise responsibly?

IG frames the argument rather well in the post above, if something, i.e. meat eating, falls foul of the rather ambiguous assessment of the public conscience should we ban that or ban the advertisement of it and hasten it’s demise?

We do seem ever so eager to try and implement rules based on the extreme ends of arguments and it is quite frankly dumb.

We sleep walk into a totalitarian regime willingly ceding our freedoms amidst a clamour to be righteous.

Edited by grrclark
Because i type like a pig with only one trotter.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, grrclark said:

Being devil’s advocate, why should gambling adverts be banned?

We have a growing tendency in this country to take a view that legislation is the answer to resolving our issues.  I don’t for a second try to trivialise the impact that problem gambling does and can have, but with the rate of problem gambling in this country being 0.7% of the population, but with 46% of the population gambling within the last 4 weeks (Gambling Commission statistics) why would we want to implement legislation because of a tiny minority?

Gambling is evidently (in the literal sense of that word) enjoyed by a very big percentage of the population without it being an issue, so why should that industry not be allowed to advertise responsibly?

IG frames the argument rather well in the post above, if something, i.e. meat eating, falls foul of the rather ambiguous assessment of the public conscience should we ban that or ban the advertisement of it and hasten it’s demise?

We do seem ever so eager to try and implement rules based on the extreme ends of arguments and it is quite frankly dumb.

We sleep walk into a totalitarian regime willingly ceding our freedoms amidst a clamour to be righteous.

Oh thank God I'm not alone! I was just in the midst of posting a reply as to why the establishment shouldn't have control of advertising and then I thought "Nah what's the point?". Then I read this!

If you want a nanny state then this is how you get one. Pander to the few who can't control their impulses and punish those who can. I do accept that banning tobacco advertising is a good thing, simply because it is so addictive, both physically and mentally.

Gambling though is not. I've gambled since I was a kid. I remember backing Red Rum in the National when I was just a kid. It was always a great day in my family, everyone had a bet and it was always a topic for conversation. I remember spending days with my grandparents where I would play cribbage and watch the horse racing to see if my 5p round robins would come in. Great fun, fond memories. I still have a flutter now and then. I like to play cards too. I never gamble more than I can afford, it's just a bit of fun.

Going slightly off topic, I listen to Radio 1 at work. The latest Eminem track is playing but it is heavily censored. All of the swearing is removed which I'm fine with, it's daytime radio after all. However, removing words like alcohol, vodka and Courvoisier, seriously, are we at that level now where we can't mention anything that is potentially harmful?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

34 minutes ago, Mr_Nobody said:

Going slightly off topic, I listen to Radio 1 at work. The latest Eminem track is playing but it is heavily censored. All of the swearing is removed which I'm fine with, it's daytime radio after all. However, removing words like alcohol, vodka and Courvoisier, seriously, are we at that level now where we can't mention anything that is potentially harmful?

That’s what worries me too, we are at a tipping point where our pursuit of being righteous and right on has the very real potential of taking us backwards.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, Davyo said:

The thread is not about banning gambling or the advertising of gambling.Its about celebrities promoting gambling and the possibility of influencing people to gamble.

Again being devils advocate, so what?

If a razor blade company or a soap company can use a celeb why can’t a gambling company?

So long as the advert is responsible and doesn’t make false claim then why shouldn’t a celeb promote a bookmaker over say a boot-maker (just for the alliteration).

Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 hours ago, Davyo said:

The thread is not about banning gambling or the advertising of gambling.Its about celebrities promoting gambling and the possibility of influencing people to gamble.

Like celebrities promoting countryside activities and the possibility of influencing people to kill animals.

So why don't we just stop everybody from promoting anything, as there is always going to be somebody out there who will be against something.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, toontastic said:

Like celebrities promoting countryside activities and the possibility of influencing people to kill animals.

So why don't we just stop everybody from promoting anything, as there is always going to be somebody out there who will be against something.

So are you protesting about Davyo protesting?

 

With regard to "celebrities" being paid to promote subjects like Gambling that many people find of an objectionable nature, if the "celebs" want to be associated with the subject and take the fee they must accept that many people will feel that their judgement was poor.

Edited by TIGHTCHOKE
SYNTAX!
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, toontastic said:

Like celebrities promoting countryside activities and the possibility of influencing people to kill animals.

So why don't we just stop everybody from promoting anything, as there is always going to be somebody out there who will be against something.

So we shouldn't object to Mr Brian May or Mr Chris Packem trying to convince/ influence/target an audience through the power of TV that Vermin control isn't conservation,it's a blood sport?  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

52 minutes ago, Davyo said:

So we shouldn't object to Mr Brian May or Mr Chris Packem trying to convince/ influence/target an audience through the power of TV that Vermin control isn't conservation,it's a blood sport?  

Different matter totally, we are discussing celebrities being paid for advertising products. You object to gambling adverts I work with a LACS supporter who loves cricket and never shuts up about Alistair Cook endorsing rifles. I also work with a vegan who complains about celebrities endorsing meat products. So where do we draw the line in regards to celebrities being paid for product endorsement.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
 Share

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.

×
×
  • Create New...