Massachusetts officials concerned over potential national vs local sports betting ads

Officials from the Massachusetts Gaming Commission (MGC) have met to discuss a possible regulatory headache arising from national advertising of sports betting in the Bay State.

Under Massachusetts gaming laws, MGC is mandated to regulate local advertising from operators by drafting rules stopping “any form of advertising, marketing, or branding that the Commission deems unacceptable to the viewer experience at sports events.”

However, many of the state’s local TV networks, including Boston 25, have affiliate agreements with major TV stations working at a national level, which in turn have marketing partnerships with sports betting operators, under which sports betting ads are aired at a national level.

This framework has led to concerns over the regulatory interpretation of these national adverts airing at a local level, as highlighted by MGC commissioner Brad Hill in the meeting, using the example of a young celebrity being used to recruit those aged 18 to 21 in an advertisement.

“I can’t believe that this hasn’t happened in another jurisdiction, where a regulation has been put into place, and a national feed is coming into a state that wouldn’t adhere to the regulation,” Hill said.

“There’s got to be some type of experience with that so far, and I’m concerned. I’m hearing you say that it would be allowed to come through, you think? Is that true?” the MGC commissioner added.

Responding to Hill’s question, Boston 25 general manager Todd Brown expressed his uncertainty about the scenario but suggested local affiliates would not have the ultimate responsibility for checking the content provided.

“I’m kind of like, I guess, a McDonald’s franchisee, if you will. I’m the franchisee for Fox. And so if they want to serve Big Macs, I have to serve Big Macs,” he said.

“I think the NFL and the network is very responsible. But no, as far as the content of those ads and where they’re placed, I don’t, as a local affiliate, have the power to circumvent that,” Brown added.

Speaking in defence of the sector, American Gaming Association (AGA) VP Casey Clark told the MGC of AGA’s stance, which sets standards both proactively and voluntarily for its members.

“We talk very often about the sports betting ecosystem and all of us working together to make sure that we’re getting this right,” Clark said.

Other individuals speaking at the MGC session cited internal standards used by both broadcasters and sports leagues in respect of responsible gambling, as well as the limitation of sports betting ads during matches.

Major League Baseball VP and deputy general counsel Marquest Meeks echoed Clark’s comments referencing the league’s own efforts to avoid saturation of sports betting ads.

“Everybody’s layering on top of everybody else’s efforts to the point where we not only have the belt, we have the suspenders, and we’ve also taken a bit of extra string and rope to tighten it up as well,” Meeks said.

Meeks admitted MGC’s task in determining this potential issue was a difficult one for the regulatory body.

“Based on our internal research, and we looked after the statute was passed, there is no other state that has language that puts that sort of burden on the regulator. And so I think it puts the Commission in a tough spot of trying to figure out exactly what that means,” Meeks said.

Weighing in on the broadcasters’ stance, Massachusetts Broadcasters Association executive director Jordan Walton suggested most of its members would have standards already set up in this regard.

“I would hazard a guess that most of our broadcasters would continue to follow their internal rules so that you don’t have an MGM, a DraftKings, and a FanDuel spot running back-to-back,” he said.

“We do that because our broadcasters are beholden to their listeners and viewers. And to annoy a viewer or listener to the point where they change the channel is exactly opposite of what our broadcasters want to do,” Walton added.