Responsible Online Gaming Association releases marketing and advertising standards

Dig Deeper

The Backstory

Industry standards move from principle to enforcement

The Responsible Online Gaming Association’s new marketing and advertising code marks a shift in how the largest U.S. online betting operators are trying to manage scrutiny of their customer acquisition practices. The code is voluntary, but its importance lies in who adopted it: ROGA says its members represent about 90% of the legal U.S. sports betting market by handle, meaning common standards could quickly become the de facto operating model for much of the regulated sector.

The timing is significant. Online betting companies have spent the years since the repeal of the federal sports betting ban racing for market share, often through aggressive promotions, celebrity campaigns and high-visibility advertising around sports broadcasts. Regulators and public health advocates have increasingly questioned whether those efforts adequately protect minors, college audiences and customers at risk of gambling harm. ROGA’s code attempts to answer those concerns before a patchwork of stricter state rules does it for the industry.

The new framework also fits into a broader responsible gambling architecture ROGA has been building since its formation. Rather than focus only on consumer messaging, the group has moved to connect marketing rules, self-exclusion, third-party certification and player tools into a single accountability structure. That approach could help operators argue they are capable of setting industrywide guardrails, but it also raises the stakes if the standards prove weak or inconsistently enforced.

A certification plan gives the code sharper teeth

The advertising code is not designed to stand alone. ROGA previously said it would work with the Responsible Gaming Council on a U.S. certification program for online operators, a move that provides the clearest path for turning voluntary promises into measured compliance. The ROGA partnership with the Responsible Gaming Council is intended to evaluate operator practices across self-exclusion, marketing, staff training and player support tools.

That matters because the most persistent criticism of voluntary industry codes is that they can function as public relations tools unless they are independently tested. RGC brings experience from responsible gambling accreditation programs, including standards used to review land-based and online gambling businesses. By tying the marketing code to a certification program, ROGA is attempting to create consequences for noncompliance beyond reputational embarrassment.

The certification model also allows standards to evolve. Advertising channels change quickly, especially in digital media, where affiliates, influencers, streaming platforms and personalized offers can reach consumers in ways traditional regulators may struggle to monitor. A program that assesses operators over time could push members to update policies as products and marketing practices change.

For operators, independent certification offers another benefit: a common benchmark they can present to lawmakers. As states review advertising rules and consumer protection requirements, a third-party framework could help companies make the case that the regulated industry is addressing risks without waiting for punitive mandates. The effectiveness of that argument will depend on whether the certification process is transparent, rigorous and willing to identify shortcomings.

Self-exclusion has been the core test

ROGA’s most concrete consumer protection initiative before the advertising code was its effort to create a shared self-exclusion infrastructure. The association selected LexisNexis Risk Solutions to build and administer a data clearinghouse that would allow a player who self-excludes with one member operator to be excluded across all ROGA member platforms. The data clearinghouse with LexisNexis Risk Solutions is meant to address a basic flaw in the current market: self-exclusion often stops at the operator or state where the player acts.

That gap has long weakened responsible gambling protections. A customer who bars themselves from one sportsbook may still be able to open accounts with competitors, especially across state lines. For companies that compete intensely for users, sharing exclusion data requires trust, privacy controls and a governance structure that does not turn a protection tool into a commercial data asset. LexisNexis was selected partly because of its experience handling sensitive records and building secure workflows.

The clearinghouse also helps explain why ROGA’s marketing code includes restrictions on targeting people identified for responsible gaming concerns. Marketing standards are easier to enforce when operators have shared processes for identifying customers who have signaled harm or requested a break. If the clearinghouse functions as intended, the industry will have a stronger basis for ensuring that promotional messages do not follow excluded or vulnerable customers from one platform to another.

The initiative remains limited, however, because it covers ROGA members and the regulated market. Illegal and offshore sites will not participate. That makes enforcement by regulators and law enforcement a continuing issue, particularly if consumers blocked from legal platforms migrate to unregulated operators with weaker safeguards.

Blocking tools extend protection beyond legal sites

ROGA has also sought to close that illegal-market gap through technology. Its collaboration with BetBlocker gives players access to free software that can block more than 118,400 gambling websites and 1,500 apps, including regulated and unregulated operators. The collaboration with BetBlocker on blocking software broadens the association’s consumer protection strategy beyond member compliance.

BetBlocker is important because it gives users an immediate, anonymous tool that is not dependent on a specific operator, state regulator or account relationship. That can be valuable for people who want a barrier before they gamble, not only after a formal self-exclusion process. ROGA said it would promote BetBlocker through its channels and work with member operators to explore ways to make the tool available to customers.

The partnership also complements the planned clearinghouse. A shared self-exclusion database can stop a player from using participating legal operators, while blocking software can add a device-level barrier across a far wider range of gambling sites. Together, they reflect an industry recognition that no single tool is sufficient in a digital market where users can move quickly between apps, websites and jurisdictions.

That broader toolkit is relevant to advertising, too. Marketing restrictions are meant to reduce risky inducements, but customers also need practical ways to act when they decide to limit exposure. A responsible advertising code that points consumers toward tools, while requiring operators to honor restrictions, creates a stronger chain from message to intervention.

Operator pressure helped shape the agenda

The push for common standards has also been driven from inside major operators, where responsible gambling executives have increasingly framed consumer protection as central to market sustainability. DraftKings Chief Responsible Gaming Officer Lori Kalani has argued that operators should not compete on responsible gaming safeguards and that best practices should be formalized across the sector. Her remarks in DraftKings’ responsible gambling agenda showed how company-level strategy and ROGA’s industrywide work have converged.

DraftKings has promoted tools such as “My Stat Sheet,” which gives players a dashboard of time spent and net wins and losses. The company’s experience suggests operators are trying to reduce stigma around responsible gambling features by presenting some of them as account insights rather than warnings. That approach may influence how advertising rules are implemented: effective consumer protection depends not only on what ads avoid saying, but also on how operators normalize limits, transparency and informed choice.

FanDuel, BetMGM and DraftKings all backed the new marketing framework, underscoring that the largest platforms see value in a shared baseline. That unity may reduce the risk that one operator gains an advantage by using more aggressive claims or promotion language. But it also makes the code a collective credibility test. If the biggest companies support the rules, lawmakers and consumers will expect visible changes in campaigns, disclosures and influencer partnerships.

Global scrutiny shows the risk of inaction

The U.S. debate is not occurring in isolation. Other markets have been moving to monitor or restrict gambling advertising, particularly where offshore operators use celebrities, digital channels or ambiguous messaging to reach consumers. In India, the Advertising Standards Council of India signed an agreement with gambling trade bodies to identify illegal offshore gambling ads and report them to regulators. The Advertising Standards Council of India’s monitoring effort had already flagged hundreds of ads tied to offshore platforms shortly after launch.

That example shows how quickly advertising can become a regulatory flashpoint when legal status, consumer protection and digital reach collide. The U.S. regulated market has a different legal structure, but similar pressures are building around youth exposure, promotional claims and the influence of social media personalities.

ROGA’s code is an attempt to define acceptable conduct before those pressures force a more fragmented response. Its ultimate significance will depend less on the publication of standards than on implementation: where ads run, how promotions are disclosed, how influencers are supervised and whether vulnerable customers are shielded from further solicitation. The code gives the industry a benchmark. The next phase will determine whether it becomes a meaningful constraint.