10 ms·
Gambling firm allegedly paid blogs to link new mothers to its online games
- psychphysic 3y agoGood god! A business advertising! What will they think of next.
- skrebbel 3y agoIt’s not uncommon for authorities to ban advertising by industries whose mission is to make the world worse. Eg tobacco ads are banned where I live. This here may be legal now but I interpret the article as in favour of a ban on gambling ads, which sounds like a good idea to me.
- silisili 3y agoI guess I agree with the premise, but not the deciders. As far as I'm concerned, probably 80 to 90% of advertising is for things that make the world worse.
- lynx23 3y agoSo, when will Google be fined for the blatantly fraudlent ads they are allowing on YouTube? Scam all over the place.
- KyeRussell 3y ago[flagged]
- maxbond 3y agoOkay but is there a reason to believe this is whataboutism rather than pointing out an additional problem we might discuss? If it were whataboutism I'd expect to see an implication that this excuses the gambling industry, but I don't see it.
- VSpike 3y agoA business advertising a potentially harmful product in a way that contravenes the rules.
- quickthrower2 3y agoI agree, if this disgusts you and makes you feel angry, try Flinton's Mild Cigars, a man's time to relax!
- psychphysic 3y agoI suppose you're being tongue in cheek but if you want to smoke cigars go for it. You only live once it you think smoking improves quality and you're welling to cut down quantity. Go for it.
- quickthrower2 3y agoSounds like your beliefs are aligned with individual freedoms and responsibility, probably something like libertarian where the government had minimal influence? This is a guess. Anyway I disagree with this point of view because large corporations, thanks to the law are like defacto governments with a lot of power, and there needs to be something with the muscle to stand up to them (the slap on wrist fines we read about means there probably isn't enough muscle, but better than none). Remember the large corps have all the data (the new oil) the cash (billions) and control the technology. Statistically if you temp a million people to try gambling some will get addicted there is no way to avoid this, even though you could say those that got addicted it was there own fault, and not the fault of the large corps hiding tempting messages in areas of the internet they trust.
- flangola7 3y agoCommercial advertisement comes with many regulations and ethical requirements in every nation. Even in the capitalist hell of the US you are typically not allowed to brazenly lie to consumers to their face. Deception for financial gain is fraud.
- AraceliHarker 3y agoEven Disney was engaged in stealth marketing, so I wouldn't be surprised at all if a less reputable industry such as gambling is engaged in stealth marketing. Disney Puts Some ‘Frozen 2’ Promotions on Ice After Twitter Flap https://archive.is/RFsLV https://archive.is/RFsLV
- newjersey 3y agoI'd spin this the other way round, even in the US it is unlawful to not disclose that you are advertising: From your link: > In the U.S., the Federal Trade Commission said in 2017 that influencers on social media sites such as Twitter and Instagram “should clearly and conspicuously disclose” any paid work to promote a product or service. Sponsored posts should be clearly labeled, at the very least
- nerdponx 3y agoAnecdotally, the "conspicuously" provision is not enforced, and the FTC no longer has any contact/reporting channel for regular citizens to report violations, other than the specific case of being scammed.
- chinathrow 3y agoWow fuck the bloggers who played along with this. I get daily requests to put up free articles on my site and I tell these folks that I pre-screen all links, no matter what. Crypto and/or gambling? Always a hard no.
- lvturner 3y agoIn principle I agree with you, but will add: morality is cheap when ones belly is full.
- jacquesm 3y agoCounterpoint: morality only matters when you have something to lose, otherwise it's free.
- TeMPOraL 3y agoCounter-counter-point: this only matters if you're doing this for social signalling purposes, and/or to boost your self-esteem, which is... kind of missing the point, and itself not too moral. Something being "the right thing to do" is independent of whether, for you, it's something you're doing by default, or it's something cheap, or it's something requiring immense personal sacrifice. Either way, it's the right thing to do. The way it matters in practice is that, if the society is structured so that doing the right thing is an act of great personal courage, very few people will do the right thing. If the society manages to make that cheap/free/default, nearly everyone will do the right thing. In this sense, morality is like working on stage lighting or sound during concerts, or being a sysadmin - if people can notice you doing work, you're doing it wrong. (At least that's the more abstract take. Humans being what they are, if they don't feel recognized for their personal sacrifice, they'll just stop, as the need to belong is stronger than conscience.)
- jacquesm 3y agoYes, that's true, if it is done well it is likely done quietly. But I've seen some very impressive acts of altruism happen near me that by their sheer impact would never have gone unnoticed.
- marginalia_nu 3y agoI'd agree with the notion suggested in the article it may not even be about getting mothers to gamble as much as it is an attempt at blackhat SEO. Recruiting a few new gamblers is small potatoes compared to redirecting a large amount of web traffic for gambling-related keywords on Google. Several gambling firms are aggressively throwing money at the problem of trying to manipulate PageRank-like algorithms. I've seen examples of them sponsoring open source projects, ostensibly in order to purchase a link from a high ranking website. Makes sense though when basically your entire budget goes to marketing.
- LeeroyWasHere 3y agoThat sounds like a more plausible explanation, they're trying to juice up. Plus, there's plenty of mobile games that are borderline gambling, look up monopoly go, it has all the hallmarks of creating addiction/gambling loops.
- TylerE 3y agoA lot of those mobile games are arguably worse. At least at a casino a small fraction of people actually walk away winners.
- jnsaff2 3y agoRemember the Target scandal way back when? [0] They had done the sciencing and found that there are only handful of life events where a large change of behavior can be made relatively easily. Graduation, marriage, giving birth to a child. The angle as I see it is to sneak in through that window and make gamblers out of those young mothers permanently. [0] - https://www.nytimes.com/2012/02/19/magazine/shopping-habits.html https://www.nytimes.com/2012/02/19/magazine/shopping-habits....
- pepy 3y agoTarget is one of my favorite stories. I think I talked about this example at like few different universities.
- xnorswap 3y agoI'd suggest if you don't understand why this is outrageous you just take a step back away from this topic, rather than try to comment on a problem you don't understand. You likely come from a culture that lets pharmaceutical companies advertise on TV. You likely come from a culture that doesn't restrict fast food companies from advertising during children's programming. You likely come from a culture that doesn't force all product placement to be clearly marked with an icon on the programme. Advertising in the UK is much more heavily regulated than in other countries. We don't believe in the right for companies to advertise whenever or wherever they like. Gambling is fully legalised, in part so that it is easier to regulate, including regulating when and where it is advertised. There is talk from banning gambling companies from being shirt sponsors. This is, I think, a more mature approach than banning or heavily restricting online gambling and pretending it isn't a problem.
- linza 3y ago> take a step back away from this topic, rather than try to comment on a problem you don't understand. I guess i understand the sentiment, but we shouldn't shame people away from discourse. Everyone should be allowed to be wrong, if comments are made in good faith.
- maxbond 3y agoI don't think it's shaming to suggest people take a beat and to offer relevant items for consideration. I thought the comment was well constructed and nonaccusatory.
- robertlagrant 3y agoIt wasn't doing that. It was saying to not comment, and offer some stereotypes of the US as a little insinuation as to exactly who shouldn't be allowed to comment.
- maxbond 3y agoThose aren't so much stereotypes about the US as much as observations about the ways UK regulations might be different from people's expectations or experiences. I don't think they're saying "shut up Americans" as much as, "if you don't understand why this is a big deal for people in the UK, here is a list of things that might seem normal to you that seem bizarre to me." For what it's worth, I'm from the US, I took no offense.
- nixcraft 3y agoIf you have a popular blog or social media account on platforms like TikTok, Instagram, or YouTube, you may receive marketing emails from various brands, big or small, asking you to include links to their products or low-quality VPN services. The internet is essentially a colossal marketing machine. While some people on HN believe that Reddit reviews are authentic because they are created by humans, there is a possibility that they are also paid (although I do not have any evidence to support this claim).
- suddenclarity 3y agoAs mentioned in the article, it's regular blackhat consisting of buying unmarked links to rank better on Google. If you own a blog, you usually get those messages weekly or even daily offering to pay $150-400 for it. Regardless of niche. Gaming affiliates are notorious for it. It should be shunned but the headline kinda makes it seem like something it isn't, although correct. They aren't primarily after the blog audience but rather Google.
- chinathrow 3y agoYes, plain old link building. But the article stated its parental bloggers who played along, so their audience was targeted in the same time.
- aaron695 3y ago[dead]
- skilled 3y agoI get anywhere from 50 to 100 emails every month asking me to put gambling/casino links on my site. Let’s say the average is 75. Lets deduct another 25 because it’s probably the same guy. At 200$ per link (low end) thats 10k per month. 50 blog posts with each one linking to a gambling site is kind of unrealistic though. But the numbers (and the demand) is there. I am sure the actual market is in the hundreds of millions for this kind of a scheme. And even though it is easy money, I think Google probably has a good grasp on identifying that a mommy blog is linking out to a gambling network.
- mpclark 3y agoIME a lot of these people are middle men -- though it looks like it, they aren't actually offering to buy a link; they'll just add you to the list of sites willing to sell links that they hawk around to other site operators (via spam, natch) Also, when I see prices mentioned, they tend to be in the $10-$50 range. But that could just be the tier my sites are in, I guess. All that aside, it's an absolute no from me. Lie down with dogs, get fleas.
- im3w1l 3y agoSo basically they have to do this manually like that because they are shut out from traditional ad networks?
- chinathrow 3y agoNo, they pay for placing do-follow links to their (or their customers) site, something you can't do with ad networks per se.
- skilled 3y agoI've actually jerked a lot of them around, I don't do it much anymore as I had my fun, but you're right. A lot of them will start with extremely lowball offers. I've had one guy email me once and I played with him for a while, he went from $25 per link to around $300 over the course of 5-6 emails. For him, the middleman, it makes no sense to start with the real offer because in his mind he is thinking, "If I go as low as possible below the baseline, I get to keep the rest.". Yeah, it's a no from me also. I mean it would not make any sense for me to write an article like that on my site even though it is about tech. It would be like lighting a fire in my living room and asking, "What's wrong?".
- testHNac 3y agoLet me rephrase this "Mom Blogs put links to Gambling Sites to get their readers, especially new Mothers, hooked to Gambling" Sure, BIG Gambling Company is bad. But the so called 'mom blogs' have no ethics and decency for doing this. If I were a reader, I might not trust the Gambling Company but I have a relationship ( as a reader ) with the Mom Blog owner. And it's that person who has abused our relationship. The outrage should be directed more at these women ( I assume ) who are basically predators preying on new mothers who might be at an emotionally vulnerable stage of their lives.
- ranting-moth 3y agoOf course "mom blogs" has no ethics. But when you bait/pay/bribe people to do bad things, it's surprising how many "good people" turn bad. The real perpetrator is of course the one who pays people to do bad things.
- HPsquared 3y agoBoth are guilty.
- etothepii 3y agoAre we sure that they were "mum blogs". Hooke have lost the SEO game to such an extent that it's almost always stack overflow clones rather than stack overflow. I would not be surprised to discover that these "mum blogs" were nothing if the sort.
- rich_sasha 3y agoThis is "just" the usual, paying influencers to push products. The product is legal, advertising via influencers is legal. Except this time it's not teenagers and hand creams but new mothers and gambling. The gambling companies are likely in the clear. They are allowed to advertise to everyone one (maybe over 18 which mum blogs mostly cover). So I guess it's bad but I'm not sure which part of the chain is the weakest link. Is advertising gambling the bad thing? Maybe. Or advertising via influencers? This should certainly be more regulated. I struggle to be outraged by people doing legal things, I'd rather think about what is wrong with the law itself.
- NerdiDotOrg 3y agoTo put it in perspective, our company works with a casino that wants to target women in marketing efforts, but that extends as far as stock photos and general language, not telling mothers gambling is a stress reliever or financial solution. The headline of this article should be updated because it's not illegal to advertise gambling to mothers or to pay for ads or blogs. It's illegal (in some places) to pretend gambling is risk free to relieve stress and financial burdens.
- Arch-TK 3y agoWhile horrifying, not too surprising at this point.
- bravura 3y ago"People are taking the piss out of you everyday. They butt into your life, take a cheap shot at you and then disappear. They leer at you from tall buildings and make you feel small. They make flippant comments from buses that imply you're not sexy enough and that all the fun is happening somewhere else. They are on TV making your girlfriend feel inadequate. They have access to the most sophisticated technology the world has ever seen and they bully you with it. They are The Advertisers and they are laughing at you. You, however, are forbidden to touch them. Trademarks, intellectual property rights and copyright law mean advertisers can say what they like wherever they like with total impunity. Fuck that. Any advert in a public space that gives you no choice whether you see it or not is yours. It's yours to take, re-arrange and re-use. You can do whatever you like with it. Asking for permission is like asking to keep a rock someone just threw at your head. You owe the companies nothing. Less than nothing, you especially don't owe them any courtesy. They owe you. They have re-arranged the world to put themselves in front of you. They never asked for your permission, don't even start asking for theirs." -Banksy
- overrun11 3y agoNo one going to a mommy blog looking for baby food recipes ends up signing up or online gambling somehow. This is a story about SEO/ search engine ranking but that wouldn't get clicks. Whatever you think about online gambling, the narrative presented here is really distorting the truth.
- etothepii 3y agoI was a professional gambler for several years. I eventually gave up because it wasn't hard to find lines that had been mispriced and profitable gamblers get cut off quickly. Coral in particular ran a very simple algo, once you were up £1000 they cut your maximum bet by 90%. I became convinced that bookmakers strategy was to entice those with a predilection to addiction and then take all their money.
- MillerMark 3y agohi