Responsible gambling disclosure strategies of four Nordic state-owned gambling companies

IF 1.8 Q3 BUSINESS
Jani Selin
{"title":"Responsible gambling disclosure strategies of four Nordic state-owned gambling companies","authors":"Jani Selin","doi":"10.1111/basr.12373","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p>The objective of this paper is to examine the responsible gambling (RG) disclosure strategies employed by four Nordic state-owned gambling companies, each selling products with addictive potential. RG disclosures are used by the gambling industry to proclaim responsibility and interest in gambling harm. Data drawn from company annual reports underwent qualitative content analysis. The analysis based on categories established by Leung and Snell in 2021 revealed four disclosure strategies: assertive façade, defensive façade, disclaiming, and ethical reflexivity. All companies employed an assertive strategy, offering detailed accounts of their RG measures, including initiatives such as care calls to customers. The companies often adopted a defensive strategy, characterized by vague and generalizing language in describing their RG activities. Three companies occasionally adopted a disclamation strategy, presenting RG as a cost. Ethical reflexivity, which involves acknowledging responsibility for gambling harm, was a disclosure strategy seldom chosen by the companies. Although variations exist in the disclosure strategies among the companies, overall, the companies strived to project a positive image. The conclusion suggests that endorsing RG as a legitimate harm prevention approach may mask the inherent conflicts of interest between gambling companies and advocates of harm prevention.</p>","PeriodicalId":46747,"journal":{"name":"BUSINESS AND SOCIETY REVIEW","volume":"129 4","pages":"587-600"},"PeriodicalIF":1.8000,"publicationDate":"2024-12-16","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/epdf/10.1111/basr.12373","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"BUSINESS AND SOCIETY REVIEW","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/basr.12373","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"BUSINESS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

The objective of this paper is to examine the responsible gambling (RG) disclosure strategies employed by four Nordic state-owned gambling companies, each selling products with addictive potential. RG disclosures are used by the gambling industry to proclaim responsibility and interest in gambling harm. Data drawn from company annual reports underwent qualitative content analysis. The analysis based on categories established by Leung and Snell in 2021 revealed four disclosure strategies: assertive façade, defensive façade, disclaiming, and ethical reflexivity. All companies employed an assertive strategy, offering detailed accounts of their RG measures, including initiatives such as care calls to customers. The companies often adopted a defensive strategy, characterized by vague and generalizing language in describing their RG activities. Three companies occasionally adopted a disclamation strategy, presenting RG as a cost. Ethical reflexivity, which involves acknowledging responsibility for gambling harm, was a disclosure strategy seldom chosen by the companies. Although variations exist in the disclosure strategies among the companies, overall, the companies strived to project a positive image. The conclusion suggests that endorsing RG as a legitimate harm prevention approach may mask the inherent conflicts of interest between gambling companies and advocates of harm prevention.

北欧四家国有博彩公司的负责任赌博信息披露策略
本文的目的是研究四家北欧国有赌博公司采用的负责任赌博(RG)披露策略,每个公司都销售具有成瘾潜力的产品。RG披露是赌博业用来宣布赌博危害的责任和利益。从公司年报中提取的数据进行定性内容分析。根据Leung和Snell在2021年建立的分类进行的分析,揭示了四种披露策略:自信的公平、防御性的公平、否认和道德反思。所有公司都采用了自信的策略,详细说明了他们的RG措施,包括给客户打电话等举措。这些公司通常采取防御策略,其特点是在描述其RG活动时使用模糊和笼统的语言。有三家公司偶尔会采取一种弃权策略,将RG视为一种成本。道德反身性(Ethical reflexivity)涉及承认对赌博危害负有责任,但这种披露策略很少被这些公司采用。虽然各公司在信息披露策略上存在差异,但总体而言,各公司都在努力塑造积极的形象。结论表明,支持RG作为一种合法的预防伤害的方法可能掩盖了赌博公司和预防伤害倡导者之间的内在利益冲突。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
CiteScore
2.70
自引率
10.50%
发文量
42
期刊介绍: Business and Society Review addresses a wide range of ethical issues concerning the relationships between business, society, and the public good. Its contents are of vital concern to business people, academics, and others involved in the contemporary debate about the proper role of business in society. The journal publishes papers from all those working in this important area, including researchers and business professionals, members of the legal profession, government administrators and many others.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信