Dead cert or long shot: the utility of social marketing in tackling problem gambling in the UK?

Dead cert or long shot: the utility ofsocial marketing in tackling problemgambling in the UK?Ross Gordon1,2* and Crawford Moodie1,21Institute for Social Marketing, Department of Marketing, University of Stirling, UK

2The Open University, UK

� Social marketing has grown from a fledgling discipline to one recognised as an estab-

lished means of eliciting behaviour change. Concomitant with the maturation of social

marketing has been an increasing focus on expansion into new and untapped areas for

behaviour change. This paper examines the utility of applying social marketing to

problem gambling in the UK by briefly detailing the development of social marketing

and evidence of its effectiveness with traditional public health issues, and its applicability

with emerging areas; outlining the situation in the UK regards problem gambling, and

why this represents such a fertile testing ground for social marketers and proposing a

broad agenda highlighting the potential applications of social marketing in relation to

problem gambling, whilst considering the challenges that could encumber the effective-

ness of such interventions.

Copyright # 2008 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.

Introduction

Social marketing: growth and

diversification

Despite being able to trace its roots back to the1950’s, not until a further two decades hadelapsed did ‘social marketing’, defined at itsinception as the use of marketing techniquesto promote the adoption of healthy or pro-social behaviours (Kotler and Zaltman, 1971),begin to gather true momentum. Lazer andKelley (1973, p. 9) expanded upon this originaldefinition to include a critical marketingdimension, advocating that social marketing

is ‘also concerned with the analysis of thesocial consequences of marketing policies,decisions and activities’. Since the early 1970’san emerging evidence base for the effective-ness of social marketing in educing behaviourchange has accompanied its growth anddevelopment.Within the last two decades, in particular,

thematuring social marketing field has enjoyeda period of unprecedented expansion in theUK and elsewhere. This exponential growthhas occurred alongside the increased capacityfor research, funding and a practitioner skillsbase, and also the development of professionalstandards in social marketing under theauspices of the Marketing and Sales StandardsSetting Body. The UK government have alsorecognised, and embraced, the value of socialmarketing with the ‘choosing health’ white

International Journal of Nonprofit and Voluntary Sector MarketingInt. J. Nonprofit Volunt. Sect. Mark. 14: 243–253 (2009)Published online 2 December 2008 in Wiley InterScience(www.interscience.wiley.com) DOI: 10.1002/nvsm.350

*Correspondence to: Ross Gordon, Institute for SocialMarketing, University of Stirling and the Open University,Building, Stirling, Fk9 4LA, UK.E-mail: [email protected]

Copyright # 2008 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd. Int. J. Nonprofit Volunt. Sect. Mark., August 2009

DOI: 10.1002/nvsm

paper espousing the ‘power of social market-

ing and marketing tools applied to social

good being used to build public awareness

and change behaviour’ (Department ofHealth, 2004). Indeed, this mounting govern-mental interest has culminated in the for-mation of the National Social Marketing Centre(NSMC) in 2006, a Department of Health andthe National Consumer Council collaborativeelevating social marketing, for the first time, tothe fore in relation to behaviour change.These developments have been comple-

mented by the establishment of benchmarkcriteria, and case studies which collectivelydefine or give examples of ‘good’ socialmarketing (Andreasen, 2002; National SocialMarketing Centre, 2006; Hastings, 2007).These criteria include consumer researchand orientation, behaviour change, exchangeanalysis, competitive analysis, audience seg-mentation, continuous monitoring and also the‘marketing mix’ (Grier and Bryant, 2005).Progress made in the UK has been mirroredto some degree in other nations, where socialmarketing is now regarded as a key componentof health improvement strategies and socialchange efforts. This is exemplified by theendorsement of social marketing as a corepublic health strategy for influencing quasi-voluntary behaviours such as smoking, drink-ing, diet and drug use in the US (Centers forDisease Control and Prevention, 2005).Despite this progress social marketing is still

in its relative infancy, at least when comparedto more established psychological and healthbehaviour change frameworks. However, theextant literature provides evidence of theutility of social marketing in eliciting behaviourchange. This can occur directly, throughinterventions targeted at the individual, familyor community (operational social marketing)or indirectly, via critical marketing andupstream social marketing (strategic socialmarketing), which can create the necessaryconditions for enabling behaviour change byinforming policy and regulatory decisions.Both the operational and strategic approachesare critical to the success of social marketing inthe 21st century (Hastings and Donovan,

2002; Hastings and Saren, 2003; Grier andBryant, 2005; Andreasen, 2006). In relation tothe former, systematic reviews have demon-strated that social marketing interventionsapplied to food consumption and nutrition,substance misuse and physical activity canhave an impact on awareness, stage of changeand also behaviour (Gordon et al., 2006; Steadet al., 2007). For the latter, critical studies oftobacco marketing (Sargent et al., 2000;MacFadyen et al., 2001) have helped guideregulatory change, and ultimately strengthentobacco control in the UK, by contributing tothe development of the Tobacco Advertisingand Promotion Act in 2002 (H. M. Govern-ment, 2002). Similarly, a systematic reviewexamining the effect of food marketing onyouth found strong evidence that food pro-motion has an effect on children’s foodpreferences as well as purchase and consump-tion behaviour, which, in turn, aided regula-tion and decision making around food market-ing (Hastings et al., 2003; Institute of Medicine,2006). And finally, critical studies of the impactof alcohol marketing on behaviour (Ellicksonet al., 2004; Snyder et al., 2006; Gordon andHastings, 2007) have also been used to constructan evidence base to inform alcohol policy.

With the continual development of socialmarketing in the UK, and indeed globally,attention has turned to broadening its scopeand application outside the traditional publichealth behavioural issues (such as tobacco,alcohol and nutrition) into largely untappedareas such as citizen engagement (McKenzie-Mohr, 1999; Bhattacharya and Elsbach, 2002),climate change and sustainability (Marcellet al., 2004), energy conservation (Schultzet al., 2007), public transport use (Cooper,2007) and gambling (Messerlain and Dere-vensky, 2007). Yet the idea of extending thescope of social marketing is by nomeans a newone. In the early 1980s, academics reviewedthe first decade of social marketing andadvocated more research and application tocounter criticism that the discipline lackedsubstance, academic rigour and a strongtheoretical basis (Bloom and Novelli, 1981).The gauntlet had been thrown down and the


DOI: 10.1002/nvsm

244 Ross Gordon and Crawford Moodie

ensuing debate amongst social marketerscentred on the applicability and contributionof social marketing to social change (Lefebvreand Flora, 1988; Hastings and Haywood, 1991).The 1990s witnessed a widespread growth inpopularity and use of social marketing and agradual maturation of the field (Lefebvre,1996). As the evidence base grew, the debateturned to the extent to which social marketingtools and techniques could be used to alter awide range of undesirable behaviours (Andrea-sen, 2003). Resultantly, since the turn of thecentury, a concerted effort is being made bysocial marketers to engage in disciplinebuilding by examining how social marketingcan be used in other areas to engender socialchange.

Social marketing and problem

gambling: are they compatible?

One area that has been suggested as beingcompatible with a social marketing approach isproblem gambling (Messerlain and Derevensky,2007), although their review of (putative) socialmarketing interventions for gambling wouldmore aptly fall under the rubric of socialadvertising, given the focus on mass mediacampaigns (Perese et al., 2005). Nonetheless,this review found evidence that mass mediacampaigns can have a degree of successchanging gambling behaviours. As the primarygoal of social marketing, which can incorporatebut is not restricted to the use of mass mediacampaigns, is promoting desirable behaviourthen this could well offer a more effectivemeans of addressing problem gambling.In terms of compatibility, gambling is an

activity that is historically and globally preva-lent, widely engaged in by both adults andadolescents, socially acceptable, heavily mar-keted and tightly regulated. Thus, it is similar toother health-risk behaviours such as tobaccoand particularly alcohol use and would, there-fore, appear amenable to social marketingintervention. Indeed, with its focus on con-sumer orientation and insight, social marketingcan generate a more thorough understanding

of gambling within British culture. Moreover,carefully designed and continuously moni-tored social marketing interventions, employ-ing appropriate outcome measures, can helpbuild lasting relationships with consumers andthus enable the necessary long-term approachrequired to tackling problem gambling (Wil-liams et al., 2007).

Using social marketing to tackle problem

gambling: the case of New Zealand

Social marketing is already being used to tacklegambling issues with the campaign recentlyintroduced by the Health Sponsorship Council(HSC) in New Zealand called ‘Kiwi lives’. Theon-going campaign, commissioned by the NewZealand Ministry of Health, initially involvedthe development of a national social marketingprogramme to increase understanding andawareness of problem gambling, with theultimate aim being the prevention and mini-misation of gambling related harm. HSC optedto take a public health approach and repositionproblem gambling as a social and communityissue rather than just an individual concern(HSC, 2007). This approach is consistent withthe shift in the gambling field away from themedicalisation of gambling, where it is con-sidered as an individual pathology, to it beingviewed as a wider public health concern (Kornet al., 2003). Problem gambling is now viewedas a behaviour that results in harm to theindividual gambler and indeed others. In thissense gambling-related harm is better definedin the broader sense to mean any harm that isdirectly caused by gambling behaviour, whetherit be financial, psychological, physical, legal orvocational.The campaign was launched in 2007 using a

mass media marketing campaign featuring TVand radio advertising, a website and webmedia, print resources, a helpline and access tosupport and information services. The maincampaign strap-line ‘problem gambling—weall lose’ was used to highlight that thedeleterious effects of problem gambling extendbeyond the individual and affect families and the


DOI: 10.1002/nvsm

The utility of social marketing in tackling problem gambling in the UK 245

wider community as well. The campaign wasdesigned using social marketing principlesdrawing on findings from formative researchto develop the mass media campaign and thewider social marketing programme that theHSC is coordinating, including evaluation of abenchmark survey (HSC, 2007). Furthermoreuse of the marketing mix beyond advertising,competitive analysis to inform development ofthe programme and utilisation of a segmenta-tion approach to deliver campaign executionsand services demonstrate how the ‘Kiwi Lives’programme offers an example of how socialmarketing can be used to target problemgambling. Delivery of the next phase of theprogrammewill further utilise social marketingprinciples and practice.Early results from the evaluation survey,

designed to measure changes in communityawareness, understanding of gambling harmand gambling behaviours, demonstrate that theprogramme is having a positive impact. Thesurvey showed that unprompted or semi-prompted advert recall amongst the generalpopulation was 33%, and when promptedrecall reached 46%. With regards to mainmessage take out 24% of respondents ident-ified the message as ‘problem gambling affectsus all and the community’. In terms of targetaudience engagement the campaign wassuccessful when assessed against three criteria:the extent to which the campaign wasconsidered thought provoking, believableand relevant. Eighteen per cent of the generalpopulation recalling the campaign revealedthat it prompted them to discuss the issue ofproblem gambling with others. Thirty-threeper cent of respondents recalling the campaignagreed that they ‘are now more concernedabout the impact of problem gambling in thecommunity’, with 68% agreeing that they havea ‘greater understanding about the impact ofproblem gambling in the community’. Finally,approximately half of all respondents recallingthe campaign agreed that they felt more able todo something about problem gambling and justunder half agreed that they are now less likelyto see problem gambling as only an individualproblem (Gravitas Research and Strategy,

2008). Future evaluation data will gauge theeffectiveness of the overall strategy in combat-ing problem gambling, but the early resultsregarding awareness-raising provide supportfor the utility of a social marketing approach.

Gambling and problem gambling

in the UK

Gambling is a common recreational activity inthe UK for adult and adolescents alike, withapproximately 65% of adults (defined as thoseaged 16 years or over) and over 70% ofadolescents (defined as those below the age of16) engaging in some form of gambling activitywithin the past-year. As with any potentiallyaddictive behaviour, a small minority ofindividuals experience problems directlyrelated to their gambling behaviour, with0.6% of the adult population being classifiedas problem gamblers according to both the1999 and 2006 prevalence surveys (Sprostonet al., 2000; Wardle et al., 2007). This figureis higher than often found in Scandinaviancountries and also New Zealand, butlower than is commonly found in Australia,North America and Canada. There arehowever reasons to suggest that the latestfigure provides an underestimation of thetrue prevalence rates given the low responserate (Moodie and Hastings, 2008). Moreover, asthe negative consequences of problem gam-bling typically extend beyond the individualgambler and affect at least five significantothers and also the community at large(Productivity Commission, 1999), it remainsan important, if somewhat overlooked societalconcern. Young people are not immune to thedetrimental effects of gambling either, in factquite the opposite. Although most forms ofgambling are restricted to adults, four large-scale studies conducted in England and Waleswithin the last decade or so have found rates ofadolescent problem gambling to range from3.5 to 5.9% (Fisher, 1997; Ashworth and Doyle,2000; Ashworth et al., 2000; MORI/IGRU,2006). The average rate of adolescent problemgambling for these surveys is 5%. It is


DOI: 10.1002/nvsm


important to acknowledge that considerablyhigher rates of problem gambling are com-monly found among adolescents, in compari-son to adults, however the fact that thesesurveys reveal 1 in every 20 adolescents in theUK to be a problem gambler is a cause forconcern.These aforementioned studies were con-

ducted prior to the 2005 Gambling Act,effective as of September 2007, which is alandmark piece of legislation signalling a movefrom the restrictive regulatory regime in placein Britain for the last four decades to one that isessentially liberalising. This legislative changewas clearly necessary given that technologicalinnovation in gambling had rendered theprevious 1968 Gambling Act ineffective. Somehave argued however that the liberalising ofthe gambling market in the UK, as with manyother international jurisdictions, was primarilydriven by the symbiotic association betweengovernment revenue and commercial profit(Light, 2007; Reith, 2007). Irrespective of this,it is too early to gauge the impact of thislegislative change on rates of adult andadolescent problem gambling, even despite agradual deregulation of the gambling marketsince the introduction of the National Lotteryin 1994. Nevertheless, the lifting of restrictionson gambling advertising in broadcast anddigital media, together with the expectedproliferation of gambling opportunities, islikely to further encourage the acceptance ofgambling in the UK.In recognition of the potential detrimental

consequences of gambling liberalisation, theGambling Commission have implementedsocial responsibility codes of practice to whichall gambling operators, and gambling advertise-ments, must adhere. Whether such measuresare capable of preventing an increase inproblem gambling will become evident intime (Miers, 2007). The early indications arenot promising however, with recent observa-tional research revealing that certain sectors ofthe gambling industry have not embraced theconcept of responsible gambling; indeed manyoperators have failed to even adhere to them(Moodie and Reith, in press). It is important

that all sectors of the gambling industry areaware of the role they have to play inresponsible gambling, and all operators shouldbe encouraged to meet these responsibilitycodes. In broader terms, it is imperative that along-term multi-faceted approach aimed attackling gambling-related harm is introduced,one encompassing education and awareness-raising among both young people and thegeneral public, suitable treatment provisionand other prevention measures (Williamset al., 2007). Social marketing may have arelevant role in this process given its successwith other public health issues.

What can social marketing do about

problem gambling in the UK?

There appears to be some potential for the useof social marketing to help address problemgambling in the UK, and indeed elsewhere, andwe outline how this might be done. Firstly,there is a pressing need for research into theeffect, if any, that the marketing of gamblinghas on behaviour. This is highlighted by recentreviews examining the impact that gamblingadvertising has on gambling consumption andproblem gambling, finding that not only isthere a paucity of research in this area but theliterature available is limited by seriousmethodological limitations (Griffiths, 2005;Binde, 2007). Given the recent lifting ofrestrictions on advertising, and other formsof marketing, in the UK, critical marketingstudies similar to those carried out to examinefood, tobacco and alcohol marketing arerequired. An audit of gambling marketingcommunications measuring the extent andnature of marketing would be of value,including the marketing channels employed,information on marketing budgets and expen-diture in different media and marketingsegmentation. This information could there-after contribute to the development of a crosssectional or, more ideally, a longitudinal cohortstudy into the effects of gamblingmarketing onbehaviour. A questionnaire-based survey (orsuitable alternative) could be employed tomeasure awareness of, attitudes towards and


DOI: 10.1002/nvsm


exposure to gambling marketing and assessany impact upon gambling behaviour. Suchresearch would inform our understanding ofgambling marketing and any effect it has onknowledge, attitudes and behaviour, andwould help develop an evidence base thatcould contribute to upstream social marketingactivities such as media advocacy and policydevelopment (Goldberg, 1995). Essentially therewould likely be an important critical con-tribution made by social marketing researchof this nature to upstream initiatives such asregulation of gambling marketing and thegambling industry (e.g. limiting the amountof TV ads, regulating the content of marketingexecutions and developing social responsibil-ity codes for the gambling industry), efforts toimprove corporate social responsibility andsocial policy around problem gambling. Thiswould necessitate social marketers taking anactive role in strategic social marketing effortsto tackle problem gambling as well asoperational behaviour change approaches.The ‘Kiwi Lives’ campaign demonstrates the

effectiveness of a social marketing programme,incorporating a mass media campaign, inraising awareness of, and indeed changingattitudes towards, problem gambling amongthe general population. A similar campaign inthe UK, designed using social marketingprinciples, in which problem gambling wasrepositioned as a societal (and not individual)problem is warranted, particularly as consu-mers in the UK are only informed that theindividual should gamble responsibly, withno mention of the impact that problemgambling can have on others. Such a campaign,framing gambling as a public health issue,could help prepare the ground for a shift inattitudes around problem gambling, and alsosocial norms. Although social norms were notpart of the Kiwi Lives campaign there is anemerging literature on how they can besuccessfully challenged with the aid of socialmarketing (Berkowitz, 2005). Social normsmarketing campaigns typically involve correct-ing erroneous perceptions regarding theprevalence of behaviour, for example, empha-sising that the majority of children do not

smoke or take illicit substances (Berkowitz,2005). It is well established in the social normsliterature that those who overestimate theprevalence of health-risk behaviours such asalcohol and tobacco use are more likely toengage in these behaviours. Given that themajority of adolescents and adults do gamble, asimilar approach specific to gambling would beunwarranted. However, a social norms cam-paign aimed at correcting misperceptionsregarding gambling expenditure and frequency,highlighting that the vast majority of adolescentsand adults only gamble infrequently, andexpenditure is minimal, has potential value.This could potentially trigger a change ingambling behaviour for problem gamblers andthose at risk of developing a problem gamblingby creating awareness that the time and moneythey spend gambling is excessive. A tangentialapproach would be to provide information onthe true odds of winningwhen gambling, giventhat research has found that both recreationaland problem gamblers appear to have erro-neous perceptions and beliefs regarding gam-bling probabilities (Moodie, 2007).

Finally targeted interventions, using socialmarketing benchmark criteria, could be usedas an approach to tackling problem gamblingin the UK among specific subpopulations. Webriefly outline how these benchmark criteriacould be employed to tackle problem gamblingin low-income groups, an appropriate inter-vention given that problem gambling dispro-portionately affects lower socio-economicgroups (Orford, 2005).

Segmentation and targeting, to identify keysub-population groups for interventions,demonstrating consideration of demographicssuch as age, gender, ethnicity and socio-economic status (in this instance low-incomeproblemgamblers). Targeting could be extendedto include subsets of gamblers, such as strategic(skill-based forms of gambling including poker,horse racing, etc) and non-strategic gamblers(chance-based forms of gambling includingelectronic gaming machines, lottery, scratch-cards, etc).

Setting clear behavioural goals, such aschanging attitudes towards, and ultimately


DOI: 10.1002/nvsm


reducing problem gambling (among low-income groups).Consumer research, employing interviews

and questionnaires (or suitable alternatives) tounderstand gambling motives most salientwith target audience (e.g. gambling to escapeproblems, dissociation, to win, boredomproneness, erroneous gambling-related cogni-tions; all relevant to low-income groups),thereby gaining insight to inform the develop-ment of interventions.Exchange, a vital but often overlooked

social marketing criterion (Hill, 2001), wouldnecessarily involve highlighting the intangiblebenefits to reducing or stopping gamblinggiven the inappropriateness of using tangibleincentives to address gambling behaviour.These intangible benefits, derived from thegambling literature, could include, but notbe limited to, improved interpersonal relation-ships, increased financial security and imp-roved mental and physical health, highlightingless harmful alternatives to gambling.Competition, and barriers to behaviour

change, must be addressed to enhance socialmarketing interventions. These include gam-bling marketing (in conventional and digitalmedia and within gambling venues) andpsychosocial barriers such as enjoyment,passing time and social interaction (dependingon form of gambling). The benefits of stoppinggambling or reducing gambling expenditureand time spent gambling, must be demon-strated. Working with stakeholders in sociallydeprived areas, for example, communitygroups, religious groups, treatment providers,gambling operators, etc, would be necessary toprovide gamblers the support needed.Themarketing mix could involve the use of

promotional media campaigns in deprivedareas to raise awareness, change attitudesand reduce problem gambling, using suitablematerials to convey the message, for example,posters, leaflets, warning labels and stickers,free items of clothing (such as hats or T-shirts,likely to be more readily accepted and worn inpoorer areas).Using a social marketing approach would

enable interventions to be consumer oriented

and reach difficult to reach target audiences,such as low-income groups and design pro-grammes around their environment and needs.Pilot and impact studies would help establishsocial marketing approaches to addressing theissue of problem gambling. The learninggenerated from such studies could then beused to develop more honed, targeted beha-viour change interventions implemented in astrategic and long-term manner. Properlyimplemented, monitored and evaluated inter-ventions would enable an evidence base to beconstructed on the effectiveness of suchprogrammes at raising awareness and changingattitudes and behaviour with regard to pro-blem gambling. Finally, evidence of effective-ness would engender discipline building bydemonstrating the applicability of social mar-keting in new areas.

Challenges

Despite the intuitive logic of applying socialmarketing interventions to problemgambling inthe UK, given effectiveness with similar publichealth issues such as tobacco and alcohol, it isimperative to consider relevant challenges thatmay inhibit the effective use of socialmarketing.The ultimate success (or otherwise) of socialmarketing in combating problem gambling, inany international jurisdiction, will depend on amyriad of factors: the suitability of the strategyemployed (must be relevant, credible andbelievable), support and resources available(which affects long-term funding) and country-specific factors that may undermine suchcampaigns.Contrasting the situation in New Zealand

with that of the UK helps elucidate some of thecountry-specific challenges that social market-ing campaigns aimed at addressing problemgambling may face. Pivotal to the GamblingActs in both New Zealand and the UK is theprevention of gambling problems, the encourage-ment of responsible gambling and the minimisa-tion of gambling-related harm. Importantlyhowever, whereas New Zealand legislation isprimarily aimed at containing commercial


DOI: 10.1002/nvsm


growth, UK legislation creates the conditionsfor the liberalisation of gambling to an extentnever previously witnessed. Therefore, priorto the implementation of the New Zealand‘Kiwi Lives’ campaign there existed an explicitpublic health policy with the Gambling Act, alegislative framework ideally suited for the useof a social marketing intervention. This is notso in the UK where the Gambling Act appearsto be primarily driven by commercial reasons(Light, 2007), and not a commitment toprotecting public health. The endless revenuestream derived from gambling taxation hasplayed a significant role in the deregulation ofmany gambling markets (Reith, 2007), butsadly in the UK none of this money isearmarked for preventing or minimising gam-bling harms. As such, garnering the necessarysupport and funding for a long-term socialmarketing campaign, whichwould be requiredgiven that gambling is, and will remain alongstanding issue could be hindered byfinancial constraints.It is the lack of treatment options available to

problem gamblers in the UK that representsthe key challenge however. Whereas treat-ment services in New Zealand are wellestablished and widely available (Pereseet al., 2005) they are almost non-existent inthe UK (British Medical Association, 2007;Moodie, 2008), with no concrete intentions torectify this. Depending on the nature of theintervention this may pose difficulties. Forexample, any intervention targeting individ-uals with pre-existing problems or indeedthose concerned about their gambling beha-viour, a suitable option given that specialisthelp-seeking among problem gamblers isrelatively uncommon with only 1 in 10 doingso (Productivity Commission, 1999; BritishMedical Association, 2007), would necessarilyinvolve the provision of information regardingavailable help. Lack of treatment options, andpoor organisation of existing services, couldseriously limit the utility of this type ofintervention.Finally, campaigns targeting youth will also

have to work in opposition to the otherelements of the Gambling Act; it is difficult

attempting to raise awareness among youngpeople that gambling is a potentially addictiveand harmful behaviour, whilst allowing themto legally do so and also exposing them totelevision adverts saying the opposite (Moodieand Hastings, 2008). This may represent achallenge because although exposure togambling advertising is not unique to Britain,allowing those below the age of 16 to legallyplay Category D electronic gaming machines(low stakes, low prizes) is.

Conclusions

This paper has explicated the growth andexpansion of social marketing and the benefitsand challenges associated with its applicationto problem gambling in the UK. Gambling hasclear parallels with other potentially addictivebehaviours, such as tobacco and alcohol,which have benefited from social marketingand, as such, this approach remains a viableoption. Indeed, social marketing is alreadybeing applied to tackle the issue in NewZealand and initial evaluation suggests that itcan be effective. Certainly the application ofsocial marketing to problem gambling inthe UK would face greater challenges thanin New Zealand given the recent, anddivergent, legislative changes witnessed inboth countries. This does not undermine theutility of social marketing to gambling, indeedfar from it, but only by appreciating andsatisfactorily responding to these challengescan social marketing strategies hope to besuccessful. We have set out an agenda for howsocial marketing could make a contribution togambling issues in the UK and beyond via

critical and upstream marketing, as well asdownstream interventions, both of which havea critical role for modern social marketing(Grier and Bryant, 2005; Andreasen, 2006). Allthat remains is a call for social marketers,academics, practitioners, decision makersand research funders to accept the challengeand demonstrate how the case for usingsocial marketing made here can becomereality.


DOI: 10.1002/nvsm


Biographical notes

Ross Gordon, BA, MSc is a Research Officer atthe Institute for Social Marketing, a collabora-tion between the University of Stirling and theOpen University. He researches social market-ing theory and practice, with a particular focuson the impact of mass media communicationson behaviour. He has made contributions tothe Journal of Public Health Policy, Health

Education, Public Health, written book chap-ters in Critical Marketing: Defining the field,

Non-profit companion, Public Health Brand-

ing: Applying marketing for social change

and has also presented at the Academy of

Marketing, European Academy of Marketing

and world social Marketing conferences, as

well as a wide range of other conferences and

seminars.

Crawford Moodie is a graduate of GlasgowCaledonian University where he completedhis undergraduate degree in Psychology in2003 and his PhD concerning gambling in2007. He joined the Institute for Social Market-ing in 2007 and specialises in problem gam-bling and tobacco control, with a particularinterest in youth gambling. He has published ina range of journals including; Addiction, Addic-tion Research and Theory, International

Gambling Studies, Journal of Gambling

Issues and the European Journal of Public

health.

References

Andreasen AR. 2002. Marketing social marketing in

the social change marketplace. Journal of Public

Policy and Marketing 21: 3–13.

Andreasen AR. 2003. The life trajectory of social

marketing: some implications. Marketing Theory

3: 293–303.

Andreasen AR. 2006. Social Marketing in the 21st

Century. Sage Publications: Thousand Oaks, Cali-

fornia.

Ashworth J, Doyle N. 2000. Under 16’s and the

National Lottery: Tracking Survey 1999. The

National Lottery Commission: London.

Ashworth J, Doyle N, Howatt N. 2000. Under 16’s

and the National Lottery: Tracking Survey

July 2000. The National Lottery Commission:

London.

Berkowitz AD. 2005. An overview of the social

norms approach. In Changing the Culture of

College Drinking: A Socially Situated Prevention

Campaign, Lederman L, Stewart L, Goodhart F,

Laitman M (eds). Hampton Press: Cresskill, NJ.

Bhattacharya CB, Elsbach KD. 2002. Us versus

them: the roles of organizational identification

and disidentification in social marketing initiatives.

Journal of Public Policy and Marketing 21: 26–

36.

Binde P. 2007. Selling dreams—causing night-

mares? On gambling advertising and problem

gambling. Journal of Gambling Issues 20.

www.camh.net/egambling/issue20/04binde.

htm [1 April 2008].

Bloom PN, Novelli WD. 1981. Problems and chal-

lenges in social marketing. Journal of Marketing

45: 79–88.

British Medical Association. 2007. Gambling

Addiction and its Treatment Within the NHS:

A Guide for Healthcare Professionals. BMA:

London.

Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. 2005.

Communication at CDC, Practice Areas: Social

Marketing. www.cdc.gov/communication/prac-

tice/socialmarketing.html [5 April 2008].

Cooper C. 2007. Successfully changing individual

travel behavior: applying community-based

social marketing to travel choice. Transpor-

tation Research Board Journal 2021: 89–99.

Department of Health. 2004. Choosing Health:

Making Healthier Choices Easier, Public Health

White Paper, Series No. CM 6374. Stationery

Office: London.

Ellickson PL, Collins RL, Hambarsoomians K,

McCaffrey DF. 2004. Does alcohol advertising

promote adolescent drinking? Results from a longi-

tudinal assessment. Addiction 100: 235–246.

Fisher S. 1997. Under 16’s and the National Lot-

tery. The National Lottery Commission: London.

Goldberg ME. 1995. Social marketing: are we fid-

dling while Rome burns? Journal of Consumer

Psychology 4: 347–370.

Gordon R, McDermott L, Stead M, Angus K. 2006.

The effectiveness of social marketing interven-


DOI: 10.1002/nvsm


tions for health improvement: what’s the evi-

dence? Public Health 120: 1133–1139.

Gordon R, Hastings G. 2007. Critical marketing

from theory into practice: the role of social

marketing. Paper presented at EuropeanAcademy

of Marketing Conference, May 2007, Reykjavik.

Gravitas Research and Strategy. 2008. Problem

Gambling Campaign TVC Awareness Survey:

Prepared for the HSC. HSC: Wellington.

Grier S, Bryant CA. 2005. Social marketing in public

health. Annual Review of Public Health 26:

319–339.

Griffiths M. 2005. Does gambling advertising con-

tribute to problem gambling? International

Journal of Mental Health and Addiction 3:

15–25.

Hastings G. 2007. Social Marketing: Why Should

the Devil have All the Best Tunes? Butterworth-

Heinemann: Oxford.

Hastings GB, Haywood AJ. 1991. Social marketing

and communication in health promotion. Health

Promotion International 6: 135–145.

Hastings G, Donovan RJ. 2002. International initia-

tives: Introduction and overview. Social Market-

ing Quarterly (editorial for Special Issue on

International Social Marketing) VIII (1): 3–5.

Hastings G, Saren M. 2003. The critical contribution

of social marketing: theory and application.Mar-

keting Theory 3: 305–322.Hastings GB, Stead M, McDermott L, Forsyth A,

MacKintosh AM, Rayner M, Godfrey G, Carahar

M, Angus K. 2003. Review of Research on the

Effects of Food Promotion to Children—Final

Report and Appendices. Prepared for the Food

Standards Agency. www.foodstandards.gov.uk/

multimedia/pdfs/foodpromotiontochildren1.pdf

[15 May 2008].

Health Sponsorship Council. 2007. Problem Gam-

bling—Kiwi Lives Mass Media Campaign.

Available: www.hsc.org.nz [1 May 2008].

Hill R. 2001. The marketing concept and health

promotion: a survey and analysis of ‘‘recent

health promotion’’ literature. Social Marketing

Quarterly 7: 29–53.

H.M. Government. 2002. Tobacco Advertising and

Promotion Act. Stationery Office: London.

Institute of Medicine. 2006. Food Marketing to

Children and Youth: Threat or Opportunity?

National Academies Press: Washington, DC.

Korn D, Gibbins R, Azmier J. 2003. Framing public

policy towards a public health paradigm for

gambling. Journal of Gambling Studies 19:

235–256.

Kotler PZ. 1971. Social marketing: an approach to

planned social change. Journal of Marketing 35:

3–12.

Lazer W, Kelley EJ. 1973. Social Marketing:

Perspectives and Viewpoints. Richard D. Irwin

Inc: Homewood, Illinois.

Lefebvre RC. 1996. 25 years of social marketing:

looking back to the future. Social Marketing

Quarterly 25: (Special Issue): 51–58.

Lefebvre RC, Flora JA. 1988. Social marketing and

public health intervention. Health Education

Quarterly 15: 299–315.

Light R. 2007. The gambling act 2005: regulatory

containment and market control. Modern Law

Review 70: 626–653.

MacFadyen L, Hastings GB, MacKintosh AM.

2001. Cross sectional study of young people’s

awareness of and involvement with tobacco

marketing. British Medical Journal 322: 513–

517.

McKenzie-Mohr D. 1999. Fostering Sustainable

Behaviour—An Introduction to Community-

based Social Marketing. New Society Publishers:

Gabriola Island.

Marcell K, Agyeman J, Rapport A. 2004. Cooling the

campus. International Journal of Sustainability

in Higher Education 5: 169–189.

Messerlain C, Derevensky G. 2007. Social market-

ing campaigns for youth gambling prevention:

lessons learned from youth. International Jour-

nal of Mental Health and Addiction 4: 294–

306.

Miers D. 2007. Another U-turn: Great Britain’s

casino questions and other gambling issues.

Gaming Law Review 11: 699–713.

Moodie C. 2007. An exploratory investigation into

the erroneous cognitions of pathological and

social fruit machine gamblers. Journal of Gam-

bling Issues, 19. http://www.camh.net/egam-

bling/issue19/moodie.html [15 May 2008].

Moodie C. 2008. Student gambling, erroneous cogni-

tions and awareness of treatment in Scotland.

Journal ofGambling Issues 21(3). http://www.camh.

net/egambling/issue21/03moodie.htm [22 August

2008].


DOI: 10.1002/nvsm


Moodie C, Hastings G. 2008. Gambling with the

future of young people. Addiction Research and

Theory 16: 107–110.

Moodie C, Reith G. in press. Responsible gambling

signage on electronic gaming machines, before

and after the implementation of the UK Gam-

bling Act: an observational study. International

Gambling Studies.

MORI/IGRU. 2006. Under 16s and the National

Lottery. National Lottery Commission: London.

National Social Marketing Centre. 2006. Social Mar-

keting Works Leaflet. ww.nsms.org.uk [15 May

2008].

Orford J. 2005. Disabling the public interest: gam-

bling strategies and policies for Britain. Addic-

tion 100: 1219–1225.

Perese L, Bellringer M, Abbott M. 2005. Literature

Review to Inform Social Marketing Objectives

and Approaches, and Behaviour Change

Indicators, to Prevent and Minimise Gambling

Harm: Final Report. Gambling Research Centre:

Auckland University of Technology.

Productivity Commission (1999). Australia’s gam-

bling industries. Final report. Canberra: Com-

monwealth of Australia.

Reith G. 2007. Gambling and the contradictions of

consumption. American Behavioural Scientist

51: 33–55.

Sargent JD, Dalton M, Beach M, Bernhardt A,

Heatherton T, Stevens M. 2000. Effect of

cigarette promotions on smoking uptake among

adolescents. Preventive Medicine 30: 320–327.

Schultz PW, Nolan JM, Cialdini RB, Goldstein NJ,

Griskevicius V. 2007. The constructive, destruc-

tive, and reconstructive power of social norms.

Psychological Science 18: 429–434.

Snyder LB, Milici FF, Slater M, Sun H, Strizhakova Y.

2006. Effects of alcohol advertising exposure on

drinking among youth. Archives of Pediatrics

and Adolescent Medicine 160: 18–24.

Sproston K, Erens B, Orford J. 2000. Gambling

Behaviour in Britain: Results from the British

Gambling Prevalence Survey. National Centre

for Social Research: London.

Stead M, Gordon R, Angus K, McDermott L. 2007.

A systematic review of social marketing effec-

tiveness. Health Education 107: 126–191.

Wardle H, Sproston K, Orford J, Erens B, Griffiths M,

Constantine R, Piggot S. 2007. British Gambling

Prevalence Survey 2007. National Centre for

Social Research: London.

Williams RJ, West BL, Simpson RI. 2007. Preven-

tion of Problem Gambling: A Comprehensive

Review of the Evidence. Report prepared for the

Ontario Problem Gambling Research Centre:

Ontario, Canada.


DOI: 10.1002/nvsm


Dead cert or long shot: the utility of social marketing in tackling problem gambling in the UK?

Documents

Transcript of Dead cert or long shot: the utility of social marketing in tackling problem gambling in the UK?