It came as no surprise at the end of last month to learn that more than half (55%) of Americans had gambled in the last year, but some of the figures in the American Gaming Association’s (AGA) latest report, American Attitudes Towards Gaming 2024, were more thought provoking.
As legal sports betting and pockets of regulated online casino proliferated across the U.S., a change in attitude towards gambling and its position as a legitimate entertainment option were bound to follow.
For example, the report uncovered a record level of Americans (59%) found gambling personally acceptable, compared to 88% who see it as generally acceptable – for themselves, or others. That 88% has been consistent for about the last decade, but this increased openness to gambling on a personal level is new.
There was also evidence of the highest level of casino visitation on record, with 122 million adults visiting a casino in the past 12 months.
Of those that visited a casino, 90% considered casinos to be innovative compared with other forms of entertainment, while 89% believe that casinos offer good value for money.
It is this innovation that the AGA attributes the gradually lowering age of casino-goers to. According to the new figures, the average age of adults attending casinos in the U.S. has fallen for five consecutive years, from 49.6 in 2019 to 41.9 in 2024.
A report published by LaneTerralever earlier this year seemed to show that much of the appeal of casinos for millennials and Gen Z was the array on non-gambling activity, which would seem to back up the AGA’s assumption that “innovation” is increasing footfall among the young.
What these figures also imply, though, is a public willingness to openly embrace gambling as an entertainment option.
While Missouri is the only state with a chance of legalising sports betting this year, the AGA’s survey certainly signals hope not just for Missourians to vote that expansion through, but for those that might put gambling proposals to the vote next year.
The report also seems to imply a growing sense of trust in the legalised market, as 76% of respondents said they felt the industry was having a positive impact on the U.S. economy.
On top of this, 65% of Americans perceive the gaming industry as being committed to encouraging responsible gaming and combating problem gambling, up from less than 40% in 2018.
This confidence was found to be stronger still among those who engaged with the industry directly, with 81% of physical casino players and 88% of sports bettors agreeing with this sentiment, up from 70% and 78%, respectively last year.
The AGA also reported that more Americans are being exposed to responsible gaming information, with 46% of land-based casino players and 57% of sports bettors noting an increase in responsible gaming messaging. In the wider population, 66% of Americans said they had encountered responsible gaming messaging in the past year, up from 56% in 2022.
Despite this apparently good news on responsible gambling messaging, the U.S. market came under fire last week. The Guardian published an article which said academics at the University of Bristol had found that major U.S. brands BetMGM, DraftKings, ESPN Bet and FanDuel had published more than a thousand posts that did not include problem gambling messaging or a helpline number.
The conclusion was that these operators were not adhering to the AGA’s 2019 code of conduct on marketing. The code, which is not mandated but recommended, suggests all ads should include “conspicuous responsible gaming message” and a toll-free helpline number.
Commenting on the three-quarters of social media posts that seemed to breach the code, University of Bristol lecturer in marketing Raffaello Rossi told The Guardian: “This relentless exposure can make gambling seem like a normal activity, increasing participation and risk among young and vulnerable groups.”
Does he have a point? Is this process of normalisation why the AGA’s latest look at attitudes towards gambling shows an embracing of what was once considered a vice industry?
Not according to the AGA, which hit back at the academics’ reading of their findings as an “irresponsible misinterpretation”, claiming that the social media posts in question did not equate to advertising but an exercise in “brand awareness”.
The trade body also highlighted the fact that the article cited 310 paid social media adverts, which did include the recommended messaging and helpline numbers.
The strength of reaction by the AGA to The Guardian’s criticism perhaps belies the cosy public perception painted by its latest report. While general social media posts, with no direct call to action may sit outside the definition of advertising, a more pragmatic response might have been to accept the possible risk, and pledge to review the code.
