Speculation: Is "Light the Lamp" harmless fun, or insidious advertisement?

[TheOtherOne]

I'm not sure when this started, but somewhat recently (a couple years?) our broadcast team started "play gambling" on specific players. Throughout the broadcast they reference it "Mickey is winning because he picked Larkin who has a goal", or "Murph has the team so he has 4 points" or whatever.

From the start I thought it was a little bit corny but whatever. My thoughts were vaguely along the lines of, that's not how a broadcast team or a fan is supposed to support their team. You shouldn't have incentive for one player to score versus another because of the fan next to you that you're competing against. You should just be happy to see the Wings win.

So the thing is that lately there's been a lot of talk about the prevalence of gambling ads. Personally, I hate them and think they're harmful. Polling on the topic seems split.

This is making me feel like a conspiracy theorist, but: Did these two phenomena pick up around the same time?

Or to put it more bluntly: Did [now a message from] Fanduel Sportbook start paying our beloved broadcast team to promote the idea of sports betting in a playful way to appeal to kids, to normalize the idea and place their hooks?

Or is the timing just a coincidence?

Or maybe there's a middle ground: One might argue that it ISN'T intentional, but still is harmful, and should stop. What do we do about it? Should we mass email Bally Sports (or whoever Ken and Mickey work for?)

EDIT: Turns out I was oblivious to the fact that Bally's is a global gambling company! Therefore let me reframe my post.
1. The implicit assumption is that Ken and Mickey and the gang spontaneously came up with Light the Lamp to have fun.
2. I contend that their bosses at Bally's INSTRUCTED THEM to play this game to normalize sports betting.
3. In my opinion this is insidious and awful because it's a great way to get the kids in the audience hooked on sports betting before they know any better. It's a genius marketing idea and will probably have a detrimental effect on young, growing hockey fans.
4. ERGO: Get the dirty hands of gambling companies OFF our NHL broadcasts.

Click to read more...

 

[Hughes Hefner]

It's effin stupid... who cares
Give the fans something better, we definitely pay enough for ballys.. Do some stuff about the rest of the nhl do some gambling picks anything but that stupid light the lamp enough already.

 

[Barry Amsterdam]

I'm not sure when this started, but somewhat recently (a couple years?) our broadcast team started "play gambling" on specific players. Throughout the broadcast they reference it "Mickey is winning because he picked Larkin who has a goal", or "Murph has the team so he has 4 points" or whatever.

From the start I thought it was a little bit corny but whatever. My thoughts were vaguely along the lines of, that's not how a broadcast team or a fan is supposed to support their team. You shouldn't have incentive for one player to score versus another because of the fan next to you that you're competing against. You should just be happy to see the Wings win.

So the thing is that lately there's been a lot of talk about the prevalence of gambling ads. Personally, I hate them and think they're harmful. Polling on the topic seems split.

This is making me feel like a conspiracy theorist, but: Did these two phenomena pick up around the same time?

Or to put it more bluntly: Did [now a message from] Fanduel Sportbook start paying our beloved broadcast team to promote the idea of sports betting in a playful way to appeal to kids, to normalize the idea and place their hooks?

Or is the timing just a coincidence?

Or maybe there's a middle ground: One might argue that it ISN'T intentional, but still is harmful, and should stop. What do we do about it? Should we mass email Bally Sports (or whoever Ken and Mickey work for?)

Kinda with you. It’s something that if they want to do for fun to spice up yet another dull red wings season so be it. I couldnt care less about their game and it’s something that should be done off air if they do play it. I doubt anyone watching cares if mick or ozzy is in first or last.

 

[Frk It]

I think it is totally fine, and I feel like this is a very sensitive reaction to have to them making picks before each game and having some fun.

Fanduel, Draftkings, etc are going to be everywhere promoting their stuff whether our broadcast team is part of that or not. The online sports betting industry is big and going to continue to be big. People have gambled on sports for forever for something that gives them rooting interests on games they otherwise wouldn't care about. People like thinking they can out-smart the oddsmakers, despite the oddsmakers being very good at what they do. That's human nature.

I am personally not really a gambler, and I have no issue with them doing it.

 

[Coach Reggie Dunlop]

This is ridiculous. Light the lamp is just harmless fun that you can do with your friends or watch the broadcast team bicker over friendly competitions. How it could be compared to fanduel and sports betting is beyond me.

 

[Shaman464]

Of all the things that are problematic, this is the least bad one. From trying to force color commentators who have no connection to Detroit or the org into the broadcast team, to actively telling you gambling odds during the game, the commentators playing "whose magic ball works best" over the course of a season doesn't matter.

 

[SirloinUB]

harmless fun.

 

[FabricDetails]

A benign annoyance. Just another awkward riffing point for Keating.

 

[golffuul]

I feel like Plauisble Keats needs to weigh in on this

 

[SoupNazi]

I feel like Plauisble Keats needs to weigh in on this

Plausible Soup weighing in here: I can't believe I just spent three minutes reading this thread.

 

[golffuul]

Plausible Soup weighing in here: I can't believe I just spent three minutes reading this thread.

Yep...you can tell the season is over and we are in the middle of nowhere, waiting for something (anything) to happen. I'm assuming that we'll be scrutinizing pre-game meals and naps and their efficacy in the coming days/weeks.

 

[TheOtherOne]

Let me try one more approach: Even if you do think this is just harmless fun, it's still plausible that some sports betting company paid for it.

We KNOW the ad industry is massive and powerful and they will do everything they can do manipulate our brains and sell us products. I don't think many here would dispute that.

So put yourself in the shoes of an ad exec with Fanduel or whoever, you're writing up maybe your biggest contract ever with an NHL franchise. And you want to keep the concept of sports betting fresh in fans' minds as much as possible. So you write a clause into the contract that the TV personalities should have an ongoing betting game. You intentionally make it sound like harmless fun, because the more people bet, the more it becomes normalized, and the more open fans are to the idea that if you're betting, you might as well put some money on the line. "#I'mwithMick was right the last 4 games in a row, this concept is easy, I might be able to make some money off it!"

Maybe you're intentionally targeting kids, maybe not, but to me they are obviously a susceptible group. You don't have to write that into the contract. It could just be an "accidental side effect" that happens to hugely benefit your future sales.

To be honest, if I'm an ad exec, this sounds like a fantastic idea.

 

[golffuul]

Let me try one more approach: Even if you do think this is just harmless fun, it's still plausible that some sports betting company paid for it.

We KNOW the ad industry is massive and powerful and they will do everything they can do manipulate our brains and sell us products. I don't think many here would dispute that.

So put yourself in the shoes of an ad exec with Fanduel or whoever, you're writing up maybe your biggest contract ever with an NHL franchise. And you want to keep the concept of sports betting fresh in fans' minds as much as possible. So you write a clause into the contract that the TV personalities should have an ongoing betting game. You intentionally make it sound like harmless fun, because the more people bet, the more it becomes normalized, and the more open fans are to the idea that if you're betting, you might as well put some money on the line. "#I'mwithMick was right the last 4 games in a row, this concept is easy, I might be able to make some money off it!"

Maybe you're intentionally targeting kids, maybe not, but to me they are obviously a susceptible group. You don't have to write that into the contract. It could just be an "accidental side effect" that happens to hugely benefit your future sales.

To be honest, if I'm an ad exec, this sounds like a fantastic idea.

You do know that the broadcasts are run by Bally's, yes? A prominent Casino/gambling company.

 

[TheOtherOne]

You do know that the broadcasts are run by Bally's, yes? A prominent Casino/gambling company.

I did not know Bally's is a gambling company but now I feel completely validated!

 

[golffuul]

I did not know Bally's is a gambling company but now I feel completely validated!

Huzzah...you've cracked the code

 

[TheOtherOne]

Here's where I'm landing (edited into OP)
1. The implicit assumption is that Ken and Mickey and the gang spontaneously came up with Light the Lamp to have fun.
2. I contend that their bosses at Bally's INSTRUCTED THEM to play this game to normalize sports betting.
3. In my opinion this is insidious and awful because it's a great way to get the kids in the audience hooked on sports betting before they know any better. It's a genius marketing idea and will probably have a detrimental effect on young, growing hockey fans.
4. ERGO: Get the dirty hands of gambling companies OFF our NHL broadcasts.

 

[Steve Yzerlland]

It's dumb I never watch it.

 

[opivy]

Huzzah...you've cracked the code

Yeah this industry totally ruined fantasy sports too. All evolution ended behind that paywall and they made it "daily" so they could maximize the profits. Ceste La Vie

 

[Frk It]

3. In my opinion this is insidious and awful because it's a great way to get the kids in the audience hooked on sports betting before they know any better. It's a genius marketing idea and will probably have a detrimental effect on young, growing hockey fans.

I don't get how the way they approach it would elicit this kind of reaction. Do you have kids and have concerns about them watching it?

Do they talk about betting money on anything or the odds of anything? Don't they essentially just pick they think are gonna score or pick the field or something super generic before each game? I've never even associated it with gambling when I have seen it during broadcasts, as an adult.

 

[Bench]

@TheOtherOne

I don't think you're completely off the mark. There's certainly an incentive for the powers that be to make the atmosphere around gambling a fun time.

Where you'll get pushback is most people accept this is just part of life now and even if you outlaw gambling it still happens so... *Shrug*

But if you're worried about kids being influenced, it's definitely not by the boomer crew on Bally's. It's going to be in mobile games, loot boxes, card packs and other predatory business models that children actually engage with on an intimate and routine basis.

 

[ThankGord]

I don’t watch broadcasts with commercials but don’t the majority of ad breaks feature sports betting or casinos anyways?

 

[Frk It]

@TheOtherOneBut if you're worried about kids being influenced, it's definitely not by the boomer crew on Bally's. It's going to be in mobile games, loot boxes, card packs and other predatory business models that children actually engage with on an intimate and routine basis.

^This

 

[Lil Sebastian Cossa]

@TheOtherOne

I don't think you're completely off the mark. There's certainly an incentive for the powers that be to make the atmosphere around gambling a fun time.

Where you'll get pushback is most people accept this is just part of life now and even if you outlaw gambling it still happens so... *Shrug*

But if you're worried about kids being influenced, it's definitely not by the boomer crew on Bally's. It's going to be in mobile games, loot boxes, card packs and other predatory business models that children actually engage with on an intimate and routine basis.

I disagree. They are completely off base with this. They’ve been doing “who’s your Tiger” or “who ya got” in OT games or any other million things. Is Tony Romo “supporting sports betting” when he riffs on what the offense is going to do in a certain formation (because you can bet on run/pass or whatnot) or is he injecting some life into the broadcast with his knowledge.

Light the lamp has NOTHING to do with sports betting. They were doing it at a minimum back when Patrick Eaves was here because I remember them picking him a game or two. (Or at least the radio broadcast did with Ken Kal for sure) It’s not driven by Ballys in any meaningful way

 

[Reddwit]

I thought it came about in response to the popularity of fantasy sports.

 

[TheOtherOne]

I don't get how the way they approach it would elicit this kind of reaction. Do you have kids and have concerns about them watching it?

Do they talk about betting money on anything or the odds of anything? Don't they essentially just pick they think are gonna score or pick the field or something super generic before each game? I've never even associated it with gambling when I have seen it during broadcasts, as an adult.

I'm not exactly raging at them over this. I haven't even written them a letter. I'm just a curious person, the question arose in my mind, and I wanted to hear other perspectives on it. From what I know about advertising and the subconscious influence it has on us, I think it's reasonable to suspect that something might be going on that we're not generally aware of, and if possible I'd like to get to the bottom of it. That's all.

I do have a pretty strong bias against gambling in general. I don't think this is necessarily the worst offender, but I would at least like to know what drives it, and promote some general awareness.

@TheOtherOne

I don't think you're completely off the mark. There's certainly an incentive for the powers that be to make the atmosphere around gambling a fun time.

Where you'll get pushback is most people accept this is just part of life now and even if you outlaw gambling it still happens so... *Shrug*

But if you're worried about kids being influenced, it's definitely not by the boomer crew on Bally's. It's going to be in mobile games, loot boxes, card packs and other predatory business models that children actually engage with on an intimate and routine basis.

That's a good point, there are certainly a lot of worse examples.

Let's just burn it all down.