As announced in the Sydney Morning Herald last month, “Australian gambling operators are expressing interest in a new style of ‘skill-based’ machines more like video games that are marketed at younger punters who are unlikely to play traditional, push-button pokies”.

---

We spoke to Dr June Buchanan from the Department of Marketing and Management to understand what role corporate social responsibility plays in these decisions.

Archie B. Carroll’s definition of corporate social responsibility is arguably the most widely recognised and states that “the social responsibility of business encompasses the economic, legal, ethical, and discretionary expectations that society has of organisations at a given point in time”.

When we consider the economic expectations of responsibility in the gambling industry, we first must understand that Electronic Gaming Machines (EGMs) contribute to the social good by the payment of taxes and providing employment to over 162,500 people in clubs and pubs, and 20,000 people in casinos in Australia.

However, to employ these workers, the clubs and pubs must turn a profit and hence the revenue from EGMs and other gambling products is essential to pay staff, maintain the facilities and turn a surplus for the owners/shareholders.

From an economic standpoint, contention comes as these profits are technically the financial losses of individual members of the community.

The NSW regulatory body (Liquor & Gaming NSW – formerly the Office of Liquor, Gaming and Racing) has a code of ethics on its website, although there is no evidence of its formal adoption or application in NSW clubs, pubs or the casino.

Moreover, there appears to be no formal, minimal standards of ethical behaviour, short of legal compliance.

So where, or with whom, does the social responsibility lie?

If these new skill-based EGMs are allowed into our venues, shouldn’t we question whether the intention of the governing legislation – what is known as the ‘spirit of the law’ – is upheld?

However, an interesting side to the argument is whether or not these new ‘skill-based’ machines will actually result in fewer problems than the current EGMs that require absolutely no skill as each press of the button has the same chance of winning as the press before.

With the same odds for each ‘bet’, trouble arises when players erroneously believe certain EGMs are ‘hot’ and that the more they play, the higher their chances of hitting the jackpot become. It would appear this is not an issue when the game becomes skill-based.

As we embark on an interesting time in the industry, the importance of gambling education is higher than ever. My view is that any form of betting should be considered entertainment, and budgeted for accordingly, rather than the false belief that people can actually win in the long run.

Skill-based or luck, punters should be realistic about their potential financial losses when feeding the machines.