the concept of 'gambling addiction' exculpates the industry by implying an artificial separation between 'problem gamblers' and 'responsible gamblers' that pathologizes the phenomenon we call 'gambling addiction' as an unfortunate result of a personal medical or psychological defect and not the exact state that every single decision made by the gambling industry seeks to induce in people. rebecca cassidy goes into this a lot in vicious games: capitalism & gambling, but here's a passage that lays out the concept:
Like neoliberalism itself, or the notion of ‘informed choice’, ‘responsible gambling’ is not a natural fact. It was not discovered under a rock or distilled in a test tube, but created and nurtured by groups of policy makers, members of the industry and academics. It obliges gamblers to behave properly – that is, in accordance with the rules and ideas that enable orderly expansion [...]
This framing of gambling, as a source of pleasure to ‘most people’ and a potential source of problems for ‘very few others’, has a powerfully normalising effect, creating two groups of people. The ‘normal’ people who gamble without ill effects, and the others, whose response requires an explanation, often relating to exceptional individual psychology. It is constantly reiterated by ministers, operators, policy makers, regulators and journalists, and renders gambling control an exercise in tyranny [...]
Responsible gambling discourses have a huge impact on gamblers, including those who are battling serious addictions. The people who spoke to me about suicide related to gambling had little else in common: not all were poor or in debt, or appeared depressed, for example. Despite their different circumstances, they described gambling problems in similar ways. They did not expect to receive any sympathy from family, friends or health care professionals, and indeed they felt that anger would be a wholly justifiable response. For some of them, this was based on bitter experience. The majority of them had not sought help for their gambling from their family doctor, or from services like GamCare or Gamblers Anonymous, because they were too embarrassed, didn’t think they could be helped or because they didn’t feel as if they deserved help. They are not unusual in this regard: international research suggests that fewer than one in ten gamblers with problems seek treatment (Hodgins et al. 2011). In short, they were ashamed, and blamed themselves, or, to be more precise, they thought that they had caused the problems that they were experiencing by being physically predisposed to addiction, or because they lacked self-discipline: the ability that others had to ‘take it or leave it’. They based this self-assessment on the easy availability of gambling, as Jenny, a married, middle-class woman who had considered suicide after a bout of online bingo during which she lost £27,000 told me: ‘It’s all over the telly. They wouldn’t allow that if it was dangerous.’ Shortly before he killed himself, Jason, a young man I got to know while working in a betting shop in south-east London, told me: ‘I don’t know what makes me do it. I can’t stop myself. I must not be made the same as them others who can take it or leave it. It’s like a drug and I can’t get myself off it.’
‘Responsible gambling’ encourages people who are suffering to distinguish themselves from ‘ordinary people’, increasing their sense of isolation. As Jason said, ‘If everyone is doing it, having fun, why am I so fucked up? I can’t get my head around it.’
which is, of course, not to say that there aren't multifarious factors (environmental, contextual, and psychological) that might make one person more susceptible to these technologies than the next. but the simplifying of these into 'problem gamblers' or 'gambling addiction' is a way to push all onus onto that psychological aspect and encourage a regulation approach focused on individual responsibility rather than a policy-based public health approach focused on the steps that gambling companies have repeatedly taken to make gambling more accessible, easier, more common, and more likely to induce compulsion. in fact, the international center for responsible gaming--the premier organization tackling 'gambling addiction' around the world--is primarily funded by casinos and casino lobby groups!
