The Advertising Standards Authority (ASA) have banned an ad from GVC’s Coral brand after a complaint against Ladbrokes, another GVC brand has been rejected.
“Have Another Go”
In March, at the time of the Cheltenham Festival promotion, a Tweet on the brands social media account read “ We’re passionate about the bet as you are. So, get your stake back as a free bet if your horse fails to finish.” The statement was followed by a video with a caption, “ Have Another Go”.The challenge was whether the advertisement was classed as irresponsible. The operator explained the ad was not seen as irresponsible and was merely giving punters a ‘form of insurance’, something that happens within the industry. Punters were not in any way encourage to carry on competitive play, nor did they have to take the offer and they did not have to pay to qualify.Coral responded by adding, “ The Tweet was aimed to highlight the prize of the promotion, while keeping within a certain character count and without encouraging socially irresponsible behaviour.”Coral responded by saying the tag line “Have Another Go” would not be used again nor will the ad be shown but regardless of this, the ASA found Coral did breach a code of conduct for advertising which may be deemed as encouraging gambling behaviours that are socially irresponsible and could lead to financial, social or emotional harm.The ASA considered the claim and taken in to account the tag line ‘Have Another Go’ and the ad showing a man whose mood lifted after being given a free bet, and felt it could encourage punters to take the offer repetitively.
Ladbrokes Complaint
Ladbrokes had five complaints against an ad they aired on the 29th February 2020. Scenarios of people going about their everyday lives, a man filling his vehicle with petrol, stopping the amount at £77.77, a woman spinning red and black dresses on a wheel and a man saying ‘Hit Me’ requesting more fillings in his sandwich. Complaints came in from viewers saying gambling was taking priority over everyday life duties.Ladbrokes responded by saying there was no reference to gambling nor did the ad portray characters who would rather be gambling than undertaking their everyday tasks.Clearcast, a broadcast advertising watchdog, cleared the ad for airing and said although the characters see gambling analogies while doing everyday tasks, they were “not shown to get in the way of their lives and took no precedent”. The ad was nothing more than humorous as the characters were only reminded of routines of gambling and gaming and this did not take precedence over their daily tasks.The ASA also agreed the ad did not breach compliance in advertising rules and rejected the complaints.