« Reply #42 on: December 16, 2023, 05:17:11 PM »
People gamble. Lots and lots of people. It is much better to be up front and open about it. Take out kfnthe dark corners and bring it to the light. Get people help that need it. Much better to have it be front and center than hide it in the back and ignore it.
There's a fine line between bringing something into the light and spotlighting it. Sports are doing more and more of the second, which only grows gambling.
Highlighting it the way the NBA and NFL are doing almost certainly causes some harm, regardless of how many gambling addiction ads and excerpts they run.
what do you think causes more harm, gambling or alcohol? This criticism just seems weird to me given just how much alcohol related content there has been for years and years.
Care to share a recent alcohol-themed segment of league-sponsored NBA coverage?
https://www.nba.com/news/michelob-ultra-becomes-nbas-first-ever-global-beer-partner
that is the global partnership they've been a partner of the NBA since the 90's and they aren't the only one.
I just think this criticism of gambling is odd, when something far more deadly has been a league partner for decades and decades. I get that you aren't going to see segments dedicated to beer, like you might with gambling, but alcohol is all over the television production and I really don't see the difference. And for all the talk of betting lines, prop bets, etc. that is based on actual data, like in his last 5 games against the Knicks, Tatum has averaged 33 ppg, so taking the over of 28.5 may make sense. Even you don't gamble it could be interesting and relevant to the actual broadcast.
Ah, but I contend that it's neither interesting nor relevant content (to me) and it impacts the broadcast and the discourse in a way that is fundamentally different from a replay of 'the dunk of the game' or whatever that is sponsored by Michelob.
For the record, I have zero reservations about people drinking or people gambling (though for full disclosure, I don't gamble, and I do drink). The morality is not a point of concern, for me.
Sure some people don't like analytics or data based discussion, but some people do, whether they gamble or not, but it does relate to analysis of the two teams. Take draft coverage. Some people really like the metrics, some like the fluff, and some just want to know about who ends up on what team. The broadcast has to cover all types or no one will watch
The problem is not with the type of discussion that gambling content facilitates, but with the quality of the discussion owing to the increased emphasis on gambling, as illustrated on page one of the thread.
For me, it's not about the quality of the discussion but the quantity. If the NBA wants to show the betting lines and have the DraftKings logo on the court alongside the court next to its beer ads, that's fine with me. But I feel inundated by the gambling ads. Maybe I'm overstating things because it's new but it really feels like I'm being pummeled by these advertisements that I would otherwise not have a problem with.
Logged
1957, 1959, 1960, 1961, 1962, 1963, 1964, 1965, 1966, 1968, 1969, 1974, 1976, 1981, 1984, 1986, 2008