Don’t trust anyone who refers to gambling as “gaming.”
7 thoughts on “A useful rule of thumb”
um, why? Most gambling takes place in games and for the express purpose of entertainment.
/non-gambler
Jsalvatier: "Gaming" to me sounds like a public-relations attempt to not use the word "gambling" which has some ugly associations. I have no problem with people being in favor of gambling–I enjoy sports betting myself, on occasion. I'd just rather have it called "gambling," which is what it is. I don't trust people who call it "gaming." It sounds to me that they're taking this from the gambling-lobby playbook.
I believe that 'gaming' is the term used almost everyone within the 'gambling' industry. So it is probably a good rule of thumb for identifying industry people, which by proxy may make them untrustworthy on the topic.
Twenty years ago, a group was trying (successfully) to build a race track in my home town. A spokeslady came to talk to a service club I belonged to.
At her first mention of "gaming", I shamed her into saying "gambling". It was obvious that she had been coached to use the euphemism.
I'm not opposed to gambling but I insist it be called by its name.
Regards,
Bill Drissel
Definitely! From someone who used to work with the industry, everyone in "gaming" prefers the term to gambling for marketing purposes and to make it sound much more positive than "gambling" sounds.
Where did that come from?
The only person in the article (Rep. Brad Sherman, D-CA) who uses the term "gaming" is upfront about his desire to raise money from taxing internet poker sites in order to boost the social welfare state. Why shouldn't I trust someone who is honest, open, and transparent about his preferences?
Pretty piss-poor snark here, Professor. Out of character.
Wkw: I'd trust Rep. Brad Sherman, D-CA, a bit more on the subject if he would use the term "gambling" rather than the term "gaming," which to me reeks of public relations. But maybe I'm just not up-to-date on how people talk about this issue in D.C. That's certainly possible.
um, why? Most gambling takes place in games and for the express purpose of entertainment.
/non-gambler
Jsalvatier: "Gaming" to me sounds like a public-relations attempt to not use the word "gambling" which has some ugly associations. I have no problem with people being in favor of gambling–I enjoy sports betting myself, on occasion. I'd just rather have it called "gambling," which is what it is. I don't trust people who call it "gaming." It sounds to me that they're taking this from the gambling-lobby playbook.
I believe that 'gaming' is the term used almost everyone within the 'gambling' industry. So it is probably a good rule of thumb for identifying industry people, which by proxy may make them untrustworthy on the topic.
Twenty years ago, a group was trying (successfully) to build a race track in my home town. A spokeslady came to talk to a service club I belonged to.
At her first mention of "gaming", I shamed her into saying "gambling". It was obvious that she had been coached to use the euphemism.
I'm not opposed to gambling but I insist it be called by its name.
Regards,
Bill Drissel
Definitely! From someone who used to work with the industry, everyone in "gaming" prefers the term to gambling for marketing purposes and to make it sound much more positive than "gambling" sounds.
Where did that come from?
The only person in the article (Rep. Brad Sherman, D-CA) who uses the term "gaming" is upfront about his desire to raise money from taxing internet poker sites in order to boost the social welfare state. Why shouldn't I trust someone who is honest, open, and transparent about his preferences?
Pretty piss-poor snark here, Professor. Out of character.
Wkw: I'd trust Rep. Brad Sherman, D-CA, a bit more on the subject if he would use the term "gambling" rather than the term "gaming," which to me reeks of public relations. But maybe I'm just not up-to-date on how people talk about this issue in D.C. That's certainly possible.