Jump to content

SFSA survey on alcohol advertising in football


Recommended Posts

8 hours ago, coprolite said:

About 2015 or 2016. It was one of a number of factors that was leading them to focus their marketing on developing countries. Other factors were that they were c***s and loved money. 

There's a fairly steep drop following the final ban in 2013

https://news.cancerresearchuk.org/2017/05/19/this-is-the-end-of-tobacco-advertising/

I had a look at some academic stuff yesterday because i'm a bit of a nerd. Most found some link between advertising and smoking rates. The most interesting one (bear with me, this is relevant) found only weak relationships between partial bans and reduction of smoking and strong relationships where the ban was complete. 

That, to me, strongly suggests that a ban in football alcohol  sponsorship would be ineffective without a comprehensive media wide ban. 

I think your claims about a ban benefitting big brands are a bit wild, but i do agree with you that only banning advertising won't have much effect. 

Does society have the appetite to shut down the alcoholic drinks industry like tobacco? I doubt it. 

I think that backs up what I am saying. That banning advertising in sport did very little to reduce the number of smokers and without further action would have been insignificant. The sports ban happened in the first Blair term where the graph is mostly flat.

With even more restrcitions placed on tobacco ads it would have been weird if they left sports sponsorship in tact. Banning the branding from packets and banning displays in shops was a much bigger move and why the industry went so hard against it. Where as when sports ads were banned there wasn't much pushback from the tobacco industry. The real pushback was from F1 who had an oversized reliance on cigarette companies. One of the teams was owned by a British American Tobacco.

I saw that the EU are going to ban cigarette filters in a couple of years as part of cutting back plastic waste. It is not unfeasible that there will be a complete ban on cigarettes and cigars in the next decade or only available for sale at licensed shops. I don't think there is anywhere near the same drive to ban or scale back alcohol in the same way as cigarettes. Won't stop certain people trying though.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The latest edition of Private Eye has an article about FIFA and gambling sponsorship. Interesting to note that this World Cup only has one gambling partner, and it's a third-tier FIFA sponsor. Basically, not a big deal.

Interesting implications for the ongoing discussion in the UK. We keep hearing that gambling sponsors are essential to clubs, but it seems FIFA is showing that fitba can get by just fine without them. There are plenty of other kinds of business happy to chuck money at fitba.

But, of course, FIFA has a big partner in Budweiser. So, what would we rather? Gambling or the bevvy?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 30/11/2022 at 16:17, Jim McLean's Ghost said:

I think that backs up what I am saying. That banning advertising in sport did very little to reduce the number of smokers and without further action would have been insignificant. The sports ban happened in the first Blair term where the graph is mostly flat.

Isn't the point that smoking companies funded advertising with the intention of increasing the number of smokers? A flat trajectory would therefore suggest that it was working - advertising wasn't primarily aimed at retaining existing smokers.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, Alert Mongoose said:

Isn't the point that smoking companies funded advertising with the intention of increasing the number of smokers? A flat trajectory would therefore suggest that it was working - advertising wasn't primarily aimed at retaining existing smokers.

I watched a documentary about this a few years ago, I can’t remember the name of it unfortunately. The documentary research showed that the “established premium brands” were spending so much on advertising for market share - a side effect of this was that new smokers would probably ask for a known brand. The main thrust was to win existing smokers from other brands.

It didn’t go back as far as the 50’s / 60’s & before when advertising was certainly aimed at encouraging new smokers - Marlboro Man etc etc. 
It wouldn’t bother me for alcohol advertising to be banned, if the concession was that there was a grown up discussion about the ridiculous alcohol ban in Scotland, it’s utterly ridiculous that you can attend Hampden for a gig and get absolutely hammered on wine & spirits, but attend a match & you can’t even get a beer! 
 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, DA Baracus said:

Given the very obvious bias they have (see the comments on the first page of this thread from them), will they be genuine if they don't get the results they want? 

 

given this statement,  ‘

important insight for the organisation to build their campaign upon’

I doubt it,  this survey doesn’t look like an information gathering excise. It looks aimed to gathering stats which they can twist to represent there already decided opinion 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, parsforlife said:

given this statement,  ‘

important insight for the organisation to build their campaign upon’

I doubt it,  this survey doesn’t look like an information gathering excise. It looks aimed to gathering stats which they can twist to represent there already decided opinion 

Aye, they aren't even really trying to hide it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The latest edition of Private Eye has an article about FIFA and gambling sponsorship. Interesting to note that this World Cup only has one gambling partner, and it's a third-tier FIFA sponsor. Basically, not a big deal.
Interesting implications for the ongoing discussion in the UK. We keep hearing that gambling sponsors are essential to clubs, but it seems FIFA is showing that fitba can get by just fine without them. There are plenty of other kinds of business happy to chuck money at fitba.
But, of course, FIFA has a big partner in Budweiser. So, what would we rather? Gambling or the bevvy?

There isn't that much gambling sponsorship in Scottish football - just Celtic, Dundee United and Rangers I think, but England is rife with it, and the tie-up with SkyBet and the Football League is particularly insidious.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 hours ago, craigkillie said:


There isn't that much gambling sponsorship in Scottish football - just Celtic, Dundee United and Rangers I think, but England is rife with it, and the tie-up with SkyBet and the Football League is particularly insidious.

Certainly miles more pronounced darn sarf. I enjoy the EFL and have a few teams pretty local. I go to Burton Albion more than anywhere else, and the presence of the gambling is much more pronounced than it is in Scotland. And obviously watching games on the telly is worse, but I get round that by not watching English games on the telly very often. Easy.

I'd be interested to see it banned, purely to see (as I suspect) that the howls of financial meltdown are almost certainly nonsense. Fitba is the most popular sport in the country and attracting sponsors is not going to be hard.

Edited by VincentGuerin
Link to comment
Share on other sites

It's clear from their campaign and survey they're in favour - and I'm sure they'll be hoping the results fit that narrative. It's been levelled at SFSA before that they're very close too - or at least like 'currying favour' with - the Scottish Government.

That said when you see today's figure that alcohol-related deaths have risen once again, and are now over 60% higher per 100,000 people than in England, you can see why lobbyists and the government are pushing restrictions. (Whether or not banning sports advertising would actually have impact).

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, HibeeJibee said:

when you see today's figure that alcohol-related deaths have risen once again, and are now over 60% higher per 100,000 people than in England, you can see why lobbyists and the government are pushing restrictions. (Whether or not banning sports advertising would actually have impact).

Thats not really part of the same issue - that report covered the period of lockdown and the suggestion is that problem drinkers (of which Scotland has more) drank more during the Covid period and hence our deaths increased.

I agree your last point, becuase its highly unlikely that banning alcohol sponsorship at football grounds would have made any difference to that at all.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

So drinking increased at a time alcohol advertising at football grounds was dramatically reduced in terms of visibility?
Zing...

Was it dramatically reduced given that virtually every team, even those in the lower leagues, were streaming their games. Depends on where the adverts were
Link to comment
Share on other sites

54 minutes ago, Nowhereman said:


Was it dramatically reduced given that virtually every team, even those in the lower leagues, were streaming their games. Depends on where the adverts were

Streaming takes out at least one full stand of advertising boards and often makes it difficult to see other at the sides (those at the far ends of each side). In addition, there are some grounds who don't have 4 sides and some with no boards on some sides.

Plus you're seeing the boards for less time than if you were in the ground

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...