Facebook Slams the Door on Online Casinos
In what appears to be a bid to become the internet users’ electronic conscience, the world’s largest social network, Facebook, has added online casinos to the ever growing list of items and services for which it will now refuse to support advertising.
In its latest outburst of Grundyism, the network has, extended its policy against gambling advertising to include any online casinos, sports book, bingo lounge or poker room. The move flies in the face of trends within the online gambling industry which tend to support the view that interest in such activities has seldom been higher than at present.
Neither the online punters themselves nor the online gaming operators can claim that they have been singled out in making them the object of an advertising ban. The site’s operators also ban the manufacturers of firearms, spy cameras and tobacco products from placing their adverts on Facebook. Also banned from the virtual pages are a number of pharmaceutical products that lack certification, pyramid selling schemes, nudity and any religious content of that could be construed as inflammatory in nature.
The Facebook policies against what its management perceive as potentially harmful to its members is seen by observers as an attempt to implement a set of desirable moral regulations and is quite likely to be only the thin edge of the wedge. The site’s owners have the indisputable legal right to dictate precisely what may and what may not be displayed within its pages and have never failed to exercise that right.
Whereas many would not argue over items such as guns, spy equipment, hacking software and similar merchandise, it is quite on the cards that a move against a pursuit as popular and as widely enjoyed as online gambling may result in a negative reaction from its membership. At a time when the threatened ban under the UIGEA appears to be fading in favour of a regulated online gaming industry, Facebook may need to reconsider bringing its censorship policies more into line with the wishes of the majority and those of an administration that believes the proposed ban may have been contrary to the public interest.
Personally I find it hard enough to make decisions regarding the welfare of my relatively small family and have never been attracted to the prospect of joining a social network populated by millions. If I were ever to do so, however, I should far prefer to identify for myself the things that I choose to read and to ignore.