Symposium gambling criticizes a lack of player protection – corona ensures changing game behavior

At the recent 19th Symposium Glory in Hohenheim, the change in gambling during Corona and consumer protection were on the program. Studies came to the conclusion that the Lockdowns led to a conditional increase in gambling consumption. Numerous players even drawn a line under the game and stopped. In contrast, the current player protection in USA was heavily criticized and stamped as poor by an expert.

Lockdown has affected people

During the symposium it was reported that the first Lockdown in March 2020 led to major changes in public life. This also had an impact on everyday life and brought fears with it. In this way, stress, post -traumatic symptoms, increased alcohol consumption and increasing buying addiction have been determined. Due to the eliminating possibilities of leisure activity, this situation also had an impact on the game behavior.

According to a study by Dr. Anne Koopmann, in which 3000 people took part, perceived a third of the study participants during the first Lockdown game offers. In 3.8 percent of this third, consumption in gambling increased. Especially for people with stress and higher education, the game consumption went up. In contrast, people over the age of 65 have restricted their game consumption.

Another study by Dr. Jens Kalke with 4672 people who was held between December 2020 and January 2021 stated that although more players use the online game, but also stopped numerous. 68 percent of the casino and 54 percent of arcade visitors stated that they had given up games. Here it was stated that the Online game the joy and social s would be missing. 20 percent of these players explained that they would be better without playing. Kalke sees it as likely that temporary closures of casinos and arcades could be a useful measure for player protection.

Criticism of lack of transparency

Alexander Wahl from the European Consumer Center USA criticized the consumer or Player protection. Overall, the information is usually inaccurate, misleading or simply wrong. In addition, the state would hardly pursue the illegal gambling. Providers without a license can be reached, although a ban usually applies. Furthermore, the legal situation for reimbursement of operations for non -licensed providers in USA is not uniform. The courts would judge differently, which causes great confusion. Wahl reported that despite the licensing, the player barriers would not be implemented or only insufficiently implemented. The same applies to the non-compliance with the specified deposit limits.

There was great criticism in advertising to gambling. This is omnipresent in public. In his study, Kalke found that 30 percent felt attracted to gambling advertising. For choice, it is incomprehensible that the advertising is dismissed by gambling as “normal”. At the same time, he keeps social media streams on online casino sessions as problematic, since here is advertised for casinos from abroad. Companies like Tipico would exploit that they have a license for sports betting in USA, but their offer for casinos in the Federal Republic was not licensed. The providers know exactly that the persecution pressure is too low. Wahl presented suggestions for improvement and called for network blocks for illegal providers, more transparency to operational limits and a uniform regulation for reimbursement of game operations, with providers without license. He accepted the state governments and currently summed up a lack of consumer protection.