Australian Communications Regulator Finds SBS Breached Gambling Advertising Rules During Tour de France

Key Takeaways

• One Phrase Triggered the Breach: ACMA found the words "premier casino resort" transformed an otherwise hospitality-focused advertisement into one that promoted gambling activities.
• First Interpretation of the Exception: The ruling is the first time ACMA has formally examined the scope of the Code's dining and entertainment exception.
• Context Wasn't Enough: Featuring restaurants, accommodation and entertainment did not shield the advertisement once the regulator concluded gambling was also being promoted.
• Two Crown Advertisements Passed Review: Similar advertisements aired during the same Tour de France coverage were found compliant because they did not include casino-related language.
• Broadcasters Get New Guidance: The decision signals that even limited references to gambling may affect whether an advertisement qualifies for an exception during live sports broadcasts.

Deep Dive

Australia's communications regulator has found that SBS breached gambling advertising rules during its broadcast of the Tour de France after airing a Crown advertisement that described the company as a "premier casino resort." At first glance, the advertisement appeared to sit comfortably within an exception that allows broadcasters to air promotions focused on dining and entertainment facilities at venues where gambling takes place. The commercial featured Crown's restaurants, entertainment offerings and accommodation.

That wasn't enough for the Australian Communications and Media Authority, however. In a decision, the regulator concluded that the "premier casino resort" tagline crossed a regulatory line because it drew attention to gambling activities available at the venue. Once that happened, the advertisement no longer qualified for the Code's dining and entertainment exception and became subject to the broader restrictions governing gambling advertisements during live sporting events.

Those restrictions are relatively straightforward. Under the Commercial Television Industry Code of Practice, gambling advertisements shown during live sport between 8:30 p.m. and 5 a.m. are generally limited to periods before play, after play, or during scheduled and unscheduled breaks. SBS is required to comply with those rules through its own Code of Practice.

The case turned not on what viewers saw, but on how the regulator interpreted a handful of words.

Testing the Boundaries of an Exception

The decision marks the first time ACMA has examined the dining and entertainment exception as part of a formal investigation. That matters because the exception occupies a narrow space within Australia's gambling advertising framework. Venues such as Crown increasingly market themselves as integrated hospitality destinations, blending hotels, restaurants, entertainment and gaming operations under a single brand.

The question in this case was whether an advertisement could promote those non-gambling offerings without also promoting gambling itself. ACMA's answer was clear.

"The 'dining or entertainment exception' under the Code does not apply if any part of the advertisement draws attention to gambling in a manner calculated to directly promote such gambling activities," ACMA Authority Member Carolyn Lidgerwood said. "Such advertisements will be subject to the rules around gambling ads shown during live sport."

The regulator found that the reference to Crown as a casino resort did exactly that.

Why Two Nearly Identical Advertisements Passed

The ruling becomes more interesting when viewed alongside ACMA's findings on two other Crown advertisements broadcast during the same Tour de France coverage. Those advertisements did not breach the Code.

According to the regulator, the commercials focused on dining, food preparation and entertainment at Crown venues but omitted the "premier casino resort" language. Without that reference, ACMA concluded the advertisements remained within the scope of the exception. The regulator was not objecting to the promotion of restaurants, accommodation or entertainment at Crown properties. It objected to language that directed viewers' attention toward gambling activities available at those locations.

In practical terms, the decision suggests broadcasters and advertisers may find themselves scrutinizing individual words and phrases as closely as they do images or overall messaging. SBS disagreed with the regulator's conclusion but said it takes such matters seriously and has consistently demonstrated a commitment to regulatory compliance. For ACMA, the case appears intended to provide guidance as much as enforcement.

The regulator said broadcasters should exercise caution when assessing advertisements associated with gambling venues and carefully consider whether particular wording could draw attention to gambling activities. The decision effectively puts the industry on notice that hospitality-focused advertising will not automatically qualify for an exception simply because gambling is not the dominant theme of the commercial.

Sometimes the regulatory question is not what an advertisement is mostly about. It is whether a few words are enough to change what, in the eyes of the regulator, it is ultimately promoting.

The GRC Report is your premier destination for the latest in governance, risk, and compliance news. As your reliable source for comprehensive coverage, we ensure you stay informed and ready to navigate the dynamic landscape of GRC. Beyond being a news source, the GRC Report represents a thriving community of professionals who, like you, are dedicated to GRC excellence. Explore our insightful articles and breaking news, and actively participate in the conversation to enhance your GRC journey.