By: Nadia Liu

Editor-in-Chief

Since a 2018 Supreme Court decision overturned the ban on sports betting, 38 states (plus Puerto Rico and Washington, D.C.) have legalized sports gambling and 30 states have legalized mobile sports betting. Whether you watch or listen to sports, I’m certain that you’ve seen at least one sports betting advertisement per ad break (likely featuring a famous retired athlete and promoting “risk-free” bets). While sports betting has always been popular, the advent of betting apps, marketed to the public through billions of dollars in advertising, has made high stakes gambling extremely accessible, creating a greater risk of gambling addiction and financial ruin. As more states legalize sports betting and the number of Americans gambling on sports continues to rise, the government needs to regulate sports betting ads.

Forbes projects that money spent on ads for sports betting will total 2.9 billion dollars by the end of 2024. The US requires advertisers to be truthful and not misleading, but that’s about the extent of federal regulation of advertisements in the sports betting industry. Some gaps in regulation include no restriction on featuring celebrities and sports stars, which critics argue normalizes and trivializes gambling. There is also no prohibition on running gambling ads at times when underage people are watching TV in high numbers. Marc Edelman, a professor at the Zicklin School of Business at Baruch College, argues, “If gambling is not legal for those who are under 21, then it would not make sense to allow advertising to be targeted on programming where a reasonable share of the population is under 21.” 

Furthermore, state governments — who benefit from tax revenues generated by the betting — aren’t doing enough to regulate it: Keith Whyte, executive director of the National Council on Problem Gambling, explains, “States are making so much money they’re falling over themselves to expand. And rarely are they putting any sort of significant funding into counterbalancing that expansion with efforts to prevent and treat gambling addiction.” Additionally, the prevalence of the ads can feel ubiquitous, which is harmful to people with or in danger of developing a gambling addiction. Whyte adds, “We expect that there is a higher rate now of people who were in recovery that have been lured back or tempted back into betting again due to the massive volume of ads.”

Although free speech concerns may hinder a push to restrict gambling ads, under a 1980 Supreme Court decision, the government may restrict commercial speech if the interest served by the restriction is substantial. New York Rep. Paul Tonko, who introduced a proposal for a federal ban on sports gambling ads that never gained traction, argued that the ads, featuring celebrities and referral bonuses, target vulnerable populations: “When you’re going after children, and young adults and college students, and those who may be on lists, in our society, who are in recovery, I think that can be pretty cruel.” There is also already a precedent for regulating the advertising of products that pose a risk to the public. For example, tobacco companies are barred from marketing to children or using cartoons in their ads, and cigarette companies are required to post health warnings on their products. 

As sports betting ads in the US continue to increase in frequency, many European countries are heading in the opposite direction: Italy passed a blanket ban on gambling advertising in 2018, the UK banned the appearance of celebrities and sports stars in sports betting ads and Premier League clubs agreed to ban gambling company sponsorships on club shirts starting in 2026. The Netherlands also recently implemented a ban on gambling ads through most media channels and in public places. To reduce the normalization of gambling and the risk of addiction, the US should follow in Europe’s footsteps and introduce policies that regulate sports betting ads.

(Sources: Forbes, NPR, NY Magazine, The Athletic)