BRAT says that it “understands and welcomes” the Parliament's intention to protect minors from gambling, but requests that the law be “non-discriminatory” and wonders how it will work to stop gambling advertising not only on websites in Romania, but also on TikTok, YouTube or Facebook, the social networks accessed intensively by consumers in the country.
I opened the letter of the Romanian Transmedia Audit Office (BRAT) to the Parliament with a heavy heart. First, I didn't understand why they didn't tell the public that they sent her. Of course, it is a position of the companies that make the press, not of the journalists. But still, they are media companies, they live on transparent information.
Entered into the parliamentary mechanism, the letter becomes public anyway, you can read it in full at the end of this article.
I was afraid that “BRAT's point of view”, as they titled it, would be an endorsement of the gambling industry. Not because I doubt the people in the management of BRAT, but the pressure from the members, who are media companies, is visible, as is the interest of the betting companies. I found something different than I expected and I feel it is only fair to share with the public.
Not an economic problem, but of civic life
As a citizen, I will not passively accept the dominant position of any government, industry or party. I have bumped into a lot of powerful people or institutions in my life as a journalist. A retroactively funny collection of ministers and firms have threatened to destroy us over the years, angry at various investigations. They sprinkled from above, from the level of the eternal snows. Until they were no longer there.
In Romania in recent years, games of chance have intensely manifested their power. Government investigations into ONJN showed how state officials were, in reality, acting for the industry. The office indefinitely postponed the application of laws for the protection of young people. The same happened with the protection of those who wanted to be able to self-exclude. The problem becomes not only an economic one, but also one of civic life. In a society with disproportionately distributed power, at some point we will no longer participate in what we call self-government.
A lost letter
But public policies to regulate gambling are made on the basis of informed decisions. Based on a real national conversation.
I think BRAT, the organization that measures online and print audiences, did the right thing when they sent a “viewpoint” to Parliament to bring new information to this debate.
Social media cannot be left out
BRAT's point of view came after the Senate voted to ban gambling advertising. Now the fight in the Chamber of Deputies is being prepared, a long and complicated one. That's why my heart sank when I read it. I feared that it may be a knee-jerk position in front of an industry that provides a significant volume of advertising. But it isn't.
In essence, BRAT claims that Parliament needs to inform itself and take into account models and developments from other countries.
There are also thunderbolts in the BRAT letter. But it is understandable that they have developed a position. You can't always start from the ideal point. You start somewhere.
BRAT, as a representative of the online media industry, has valid arguments in its view, in my opinion. As, again this is just my opinion, the letter also provides unclear or even wrong data.
Among the correct ones: BRAT's observation that, once applied, it is mandatory that the law explicitly refers to and can be applied in the cases of TikTok, Youtube, Facebook and other similar platforms.
The consumption of social networks is huge in Romania. According to TikTok's official data, with 9.1 million active users, Romania is one of the EU countries with the highest consumption of TikTok, proportional to the population.
But I think there are also invalid arguments from BRAT's point of view: for example, the fact that in countries where betting advertising was banned, the number of players did not decrease. Journalists from Snoop gave clear counterexamples. It is true that the old gamblers have remained almost as many, but it is equally true that the number of new entrants has halved. Snoop gave a balanced report with pros and cons.
The rooms are important, but the stake is online
In recent weeks, in Romania, the attitude of the mayors towards the gaming halls has been emphasized. Some say they will remove them. But online regulation is the real stake of public protection or non-protection.
The US is a country where physical gambling venues are few, tightly controlled and generally far from urban hubs. But when they launched online gaming, they found themselves with an epidemic of social risk: a quarter of sports bettors say they can't pay their bills because of money lost gambling. Half of men between the ages of 18 and 49 have an active online sports betting account.
Americans realized that they got here not because they built 10 more cities like Las Vegas, but because they liberalized betting and unlimited advertising, which feeds millions of “Las Vegas attractions”, on the mobile phone.
Along with BRAT's arguments, all these data could participate in the debate in the Chamber of Deputies, which will probably last for months, if not longer, given the previous experiences on such laws.
It is normal for the parliamentary mechanism to work calibrated, not at a gallop. Turbo laws sound good when revving the engine, but consumption must be correctly anticipated.
