Saturation advertising of promotions further drives the uptake of online gambling. In their study of young men and betting, Jenkinson and colleagues found that 81 per cent of gamblers reported having used at least one form of betting promotion in the previous 12 months.107 The interviews conducted for the study give a feel for the ruthless approach of betting companies:

  ‘I’ve got an account with just about all of the bookmakers … The reason is they all have different promotions where they offer free bets. I always take advantage of those promotions.’

  ‘If you haven’t put money in a certain account they will start ringing you, or they’ll message you and they’ll email you … saying deposit money now – I’ll give you this if you deposit money, so they’re quite full on.’

  It’s not just inducements fuelling the enormous profits of online gambling companies. Other forms of unethical, but not illegal, behaviour drive their business model. Financial Counselling Australia’s report into the impact of uncontrolled sports betting discovered betting companies sharing client data. For example, when a client ceases gambling with one company, the company trades client lists with another company, which then offers clients targeted incentives or enticements such as credit to draw them back into gambling with a new company. The fact that gambling companies are not required to conduct financial risk assessments on clients prior to opening an account facilitates such sharing of information.108

  Why haven’t these unethical inducements been stopped? It seems an obvious place to begin reducing gambling harm – and, after all, Australian state and federal governments have seen years of debates and inquires highlighting the ruthless activities of gambling companies. The answer is, as it always has been, self-interest. As Andrew Wilkie said in 2019, state and territory governments ‘have consistently shown that they cannot be trusted when it comes to overseeing gambling’. On the one hand, he said, they want to maximise gambling revenue, while on the other hand they need to ensure that punters are protected: ‘There’s a conflict of interest that doesn’t work.’109 And there was no national regulator, because federal governments haven’t been willing to take on the responsibility.

  Targeting children

  Gambling researcher Samantha Thomas conducted a recent study which found that one-third of young adults who gambled started before the age of 18. In other words, lots of teenagers are gambling.110 How did we arrive at such a dangerous outcome?

  Companies including Sportsbet argue black and blue that they do not target children in their advertising, and they take seriously their responsibilities under the Commercial Television Industry Code of Practice, which prohibits gambling ads in certain ‘G’ classification periods – 6 am to 8.30 am and 4 pm to 7 pm. But news and sports programs have been exempted from this prohibition.111 The exemption of sport – which of course is the foundation of the online gambling business model – allows betting companies to make the disingenuous claim that they do not target children.

  The linking of gambling with sport and the subsequent flooding of sports programs with advertising means children are inevitably targeted. And children and young people are vulnerable to such advertising, because younger age groups experience more intensive urges but lack the ability to resist, which results in more emotionally driven and impulsive behaviour.112 As Tim Costello points out, gambling companies depend on ‘fresh applicants from the next generation coming through because the business model sees so many people bankrupt, going to jail or maybe finally using the self-exclusion program, BetStop’.113

  Focusing gambling ads on sports broadcasts is simply predatory corporate behaviour. The effect has been to groom children into becoming the next generation of gamblers. Australian researchers had established this by 2016. In a research project undertaken that year by a group of gambling and health researchers, 48 children, designated as sports fans, were interviewed about their awareness of gambling ads and brand names, and their technical understanding of online gambling. The findings were disturbing.

  Predictably, children in the study were able to identify brand names and brand-specific advertisements. Some children had detailed recall of the narrative construction of the ads. This included children as young as 12. They described ‘everyone having fun’ in the gambling ads, and people betting while socialising with their friends – ‘someone wins and they all go crazy’. Children in the study said that the ads ‘show you how to do it [gamble]’. They were familiar with odds, betting options, promotions, creating an online account and the factors to take into account when placing a bet.114

  One 13-year-old boy could recount the way that multis were being promoted as virtually a failsafe way of betting. He told the researchers that the ads for multis said that ‘if one leg fails you can get your money back and a lot of the time it says if there’s a certain margin but your team loses, then you get your money back. A lot of the time it’s money back.’

  Researchers involved in the study were able to link the impact of gambling ads on children to the type of strategies companies deployed: humour, storylines, sporting heroes and celebrities. All these strategies are appealing to children.

  Another way gambling companies target young people is by plastering advertisements on the social media platforms they commonly use: Snapchat, Facebook, Instagram and TikTok. Sports betting brands modified and adapted their content to align with current social media and technological trends, including the use of memes, emojis, podcasts and pop-culture references.115 In many cases, these ads are not visible to parents. In fact, parents may not be aware of the extent to which their children are being exposed to gambling ads on social media.

  Nearly a decade on from the findings that gambling advertising was harming children and young people, such ads are still saturating the airwaves of free-to-air sports broadcasts and social media. And there have been instances of gambling companies being exposed for slotting ads specifically into online children’s programming. In 2024, for example, The Guardian reported that Sportsbet placed gambling ads on Spotify before and after Disney songs.116

  The upshot is the creation of a sophisticated gambling culture among young people. A 2020 Youth Gambling Study conducted by researchers at Central Queensland University found that one-third of adolescents surveyed reported that gambling advertising had increased their knowledge of gambling options. A similar number considered gambling on sports to be normal.117

  By 2023, it was estimated that 430 000 children under 16 were engaged in betting, leading Tim Costello to fire a broadside at the online gambling industry for grooming children. In fact, he claimed, the industry was ‘grooming our kids with impunity. And the implications will be horrific and lifelong.’118

  The experience of schools confirms the seriousness of the emerging epidemic of youth gambling. Some report that they are increasingly forced to tackle the impact of gambling on students’ education and brain development.119

  The rise of online gambling has presented policy-makers with a wicked set of challenges. How far should the entertainment opportunities for online gambling be allowed to risk social harm? Where should the balance be struck? State and federal governments have been loath to tackle these questions – and none more so than Prime Minister Anthony Albanese, as we’ll see in Chapter 12.

  10 RUNNING FOR THEIR LIVES

  The New South Wales greyhound industry’s annual ‘Million Dollar Chase’ is billed as the richest greyhound race in the world. Heavily sponsored by betting giant Ladbrokes and promoted by the livestreaming website of Greyhound Racing New South Wales (GRNSW), thedogs. com.au, the event was subsidised by a one-off grant of $500 000 from the New South Wales government in 2018. The event involves a series of heats throughout regional New South Wales, culminating in the final at Sydney’s Wentworth Park track.

  Such is the level of interest in the event, Australian greyhound bookmakers feature race odds months ahead of the final. But behind the glitz and the glamour lies a harrowing truth: the race to the finish line is paved with the injured bodies and deaths of numerous greyhounds. In 2023, when four dogs were seriously injured, the event was described by animal rights activists as ‘a night of horror’. The following year, 19 dogs were injured across the heats and final.1

  Few sports have had their fortunes transformed by Big Gambling as much as greyhound racing.2 It’s a disturbing story, given the sport’s long record of cruelty. Up to 200 dogs are reported injured across the country during official races each week. Some die from cardiac arrest due to the extreme physical intensity of racing. Often injuries are ‘uneconomical’ to treat, hence the owner will elect to have the dog killed.3 As a recent study by veterinarians acknowledged, ‘Race day fractures and injuries have a negative impact on greyhound welfare and the industry’s social license to operate.’4

  But race days are just the tip of the iceberg of the industry’s neglect of its responsibilities to the welfare of its animal participants. Following multiple controversies, greyhound racing has become the most reviled sport in Australia.

  The industry was briefly banned in New South Wales in 2016 following revelations on the ABC’s Four Corners of the use of ‘live bait’ in training greyhounds despite it being banned, and of the industrial-scale killing of unwanted dogs.5 Yet by the early 2020s, greyhound racing was booming again. Betting on ‘the dogs’ represented 22 per cent of total betting turnover in New South Wales. In 2021 wagering on Australian greyhound racing for the first time burst through the $10-billion barrier, a $1.75-billion uplift since 2020, and nearly double the $5.92 billion of 2017. In fact, greyhounds have been a driving force in the online gambling industry. As one commentator noted in 2021, they ‘already provide by far the highest number of racing and sporting events, thereby contributing mightily towards the daily efficiency of the racing and sporting marketplace’.6

  With the sport continuing to enjoy rapid growth, betting operators have poured millions into sponsorships and promotions, increasing the demand for greyhound racing among punters.7 The big corporate gambling companies couldn’t be happier. ‘There’s no question that wagering on greyhound racing continues to go from strength to strength,’ TopSport’s Tristan Merlehan said. He assured readers of The Greyhound Recorder that at his company, one of the country’s ‘go-to’ online sports betting platforms, ‘we’ll be even more aggressive in the next 12 months on greyhounds to ensure that we continue to see that incremental growth’.8 It sounded like greyhounds were expected to drive the profits of gambling companies.

  How was it that the sport boomed in Australia after almost being permanently shuttered in New South Wales, the epicentre of the local industry? And what role has Big Gambling played in promoting an industry that has systemic abuse of animals at the heart of its business model?

  Greyhounds, as many people know, are noble creatures with a lineage dating back to biblical times. They are among the most docile and companionable breeds of dog. One owner of rehomed racing dogs described them as ‘calm and calming dogs that repay love in spades’.9 But with the right stimuli, greyhounds can be turned into efficient hunters for game, because they can run like the wind. Because of this ability, since the medieval era greyhounds became prized companions for the British nobility.

  English aristocrats began the sport of greyhound ‘coursing’ – a baiting contest in which two dogs chased and sought to kill a hare in an open meadow.10 Coursing for wallabies began in the Australian colonies in the 1860s, before the first racing tracks – in which the dogs chased a mechanical ‘bait’ or ‘lure’ – were built in the late 1920s. Underpinned by gambling, the track sport took off, but its participants were regularly exposed in the press for engaging in live baiting. In the 1930s, for example, Sydney residents frequently complained of cats being stolen from their owners; the Royal Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals (RSPCA) believed they were being snatched by greyhound trainers and used for live baiting.11

  Enticing dogs with the sight and smell of squirming, bloody animals hoisted onto lures has long been thought to make greyhounds faster, more aggressive runners. The idea is that before a dog can chase a mechanical rabbit around a racetrack, it needs to develop a taste for what it is chasing. In the industry this is called ‘blooding’ a dog.12

  The life of a competitive greyhound is relatively short. Starting their racing career at about one and a half years of age, they are generally retired by between three and five years of age, or earlier if they develop injuries or perform below expectations. And not all greyhound puppies become competitive runners. With each litter producing up to ten puppies, thousands more dogs are bred each year than the industry needs. What to do with the surplus dogs?

  It is the fate of the unsuccessful dogs and the unwanted puppies, and the live-baiting training methods, that largely drive the claim that greyhound racing is irredeemably linked to cruelty. Inevitably the question arises: why is it allowed to continue?

  The greyhound racing industry justifies its existence mainly on economic grounds – the employment it offers, especially in regional areas.13 The New South Wales greyhound industry puts this figure at $144 million in annual direct economic contribution, and $95 million in indirect contribution. But with the state generating $8 billion in gross domestic product, in reality the greyhound industry’s contribution is minuscule.

  Then there is the nostalgic argument that the sport represents a link to a disappearing ‘old’ Australian way of life. This is fostered primarily by industry participants in country areas, where local greyhound clubs have traditionally been a community social hub. Greyhounds have long been seen as the ‘poor man’s horse’, as its participation costs are much lower. Consequently, the sport has been dominated by hobbyists; there are only three big trainers in each of the larger states.

  However, the central justification for the continuation of the sport is its links to gambling, especially in the modern era of online sports betting. For hobbyists and big trainers alike, the return they require on the investment they make in dogs and training can lead to systematic cruelty.

  Gambling takes off

  After years of falling attendances at greyhound tracks, the industry was transformed from the late 1990s by a combination of live broadcasting of races and the advent of online gambling, with its accessible smartphone wizardry.

  In 1998, Tabcorp, Australia’s largest bookmaker, extended its television arm, Sky Racing, to include live broadcasts of greyhound racing into pubs and clubs. The Newcastle Herald described the importance of the development: ‘To have NSW country greyhound racing promoted on Sky Channel four days a week, 52 weeks a year, is a major step forward.’14 In the process, the state’s pubs became venues for multiple forms of gambling: poker machines, live sports broadcasting and online gambling via smartphones. The sale of alcohol boosted the level of gambling.

  The deal with Sky paid off handsomely for both Tapcorp and the greyhound industry. With two channels, Sky transmits to more than 5000 outlets across Australia and into 51 countries around the world via satellite, with spinoff opportunities for advertising by the big wagering companies.15

  Critics allege that Tabcorp’s success has been driven by a ruthless corporate culture. According to industry watcher Bruce Teague, ‘Fast cash and short vision rules. Quality is irrelevant, only quantity counts.’16 Greyhounds were being flogged for company profits: ‘There are far more greyhound meetings than in any of the other two codes [harness and gallop horse racing]. They are important in maintaining betting continuity.’ Tabcorp, Teague argued, was ‘effectively unsupervised’, except in a few small legal areas, and so can ‘get away with almost anything’.

  In effect, greyhound racing in New South Wales was operated as a subsidiary business of Tabcorp. Eighty to 90 per cent of the income GRNSW received came from wagering on Sky Racing. Tabcorp set the number of races to be held each year and determined some of the parameters for welfare issues. For example, GRNSW declined to reduce the number of dogs racing in each event from eight to six in order to reduce congestion and injuries. Presumably, this was because it would reduce the return on gambling.

  In 2014, Ladbrokes developed what the company described as an ‘iron-clad’ funding relationship with GRNSW. As the company proudly stated, it had poured ‘tens of millions of dollars into the industry, most importantly at grassroots level’.17

  The Murdoch family also became major players in the greyhound gambling market. Rupert Murdoch, a legendary corporate gambler, had dabbled in punting since the 1970s, striking numerous deals to push his huge Australian and British tabloid newspaper readership – and, later, his Sky UK broadcast audience – into ‘the arms of bookmakers’.18 Under the influence of Murdoch’s son Lachlan, the family business moved more aggressively into gambling, taking ownership in 2018 of Racenet, a racing news, analysis and tipping site, along with a major stake in Dublin-based gambling giant Flutter Entertainment. Consequently, the Murdochs and their executives were enthusiastic supporters of the gambling and racing industries.

  Tabcorp and other wagering companies found a new, lucrative market in the under-35s. This age group is more comfortable with online gambling and more likely to be out at night in clubs and pubs where greyhound racing is televised.19

  Public relations also helped grow the numbers both of online punters and of those who still liked attending live events. The industry promoted the normalisation of greyhound racing in the public’s mind as ‘glitz, glamour, good times, happy dogs and one key message: animal welfare’.20 Above all, the sport was supposed to be ‘family friendly’. Racetracks from around New South Wales have, for years, regularly promoted family fun days, with free entry for children, ‘face painting, rides & gifts for the kids’.21