IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/taf/intgms/v19y2019i2p312-326.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Comparing the Twitter posting of British gambling operators and gambling affiliates: a summative content analysis

Author

Listed:
  • Scott Houghton
  • Andrew McNeil
  • Mitchell Hogg
  • Mark Moss

Abstract

The current study aimed to assess the type of content posted on Twitter by British gambling operators and gambling affiliates; third-party firms who are financially incentivized to attract custom to gambling operators. Five thousand and twenty-nine tweets from 5 gambling operators and 8315 tweets from 5 gambling affiliates were collected over a 2-week period. A summative content analysis was carried out whereby each tweet was coded for its main content. Tweets were grouped together into content categories and the percentage of tweets in each content category was calculated for both operators and affiliates. The nine categories of content found were: direct advertising, betting assistance, sports content, customer engagement, humour, update of current bet status, promotional content, safer gambling and ‘other’. Gambling operators had a higher proportion of posts in the sports content and humorous content categories, whilst affiliates had a higher proportion of posts within the direct advertising and betting assistance categories. These findings suggest that the affiliates were more direct in their posting style whereas operators followed a more indirect approach, reflective of a branding strategy. Future research should address how interacting with different types of gambling content on social media impacts upon gambling attitudes and behaviour.

Suggested Citation

  • Scott Houghton & Andrew McNeil & Mitchell Hogg & Mark Moss, 2019. "Comparing the Twitter posting of British gambling operators and gambling affiliates: a summative content analysis," International Gambling Studies, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 19(2), pages 312-326, May.
  • Handle: RePEc:taf:intgms:v:19:y:2019:i:2:p:312-326
    DOI: 10.1080/14459795.2018.1561923
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://hdl.handle.net/10.1080/14459795.2018.1561923
    Download Restriction: Access to full text is restricted to subscribers.

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1080/14459795.2018.1561923?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:taf:intgms:v:19:y:2019:i:2:p:312-326. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Chris Longhurst (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.tandfonline.com/RIGS20 .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.