Which one is responsible for gambling addiction: Livestreamers or Youtubers?

[shanz]

If YouTube influencers can fake their videos and edit them just to show how lucky they are, livestreamers can also use sponsored accounts or virtual balances. Still, I think that whether they use real money or not, they share everything in real time, and they show that gambling is not easy and is actually risky. this presents a more realistic perspective of the industry compared to edited YouTube videos that discuss only positive experiences and big fortunes made. What do you think?

[Oshosondy]

It is people that should not be dumb, why should people believe an influencer? From their name, you know what they are. They only receive money from companies to promote the company. So influencers receive money from gambling site to promote the gambling site. Expect everything the influencers will talk about the gambling site to be what will promote the gambling site. Although I have watch some videos about people that still promote the gambling site but the gambler lose money in the video or win money in a dream on the gambling site but out of 100% promoting videos, hardly will you see 1% like that.

[swogerino]

If people keep looking their videos then it is not their fault, it was my fault yesterday after seeing so many people hitting max win in Fire in the hole 2 slot machine from NolimitCity that I immediately went to try my luck. I played for several hours buying different bonuses from lowest 70x my bet to highest 600x my bet (not played 3300x one as there is no point risking that much) and never was able to achieve it. I did like 2-3 other deposits which made me go to the decision of self banning myself permanently from gambling again. So based on this we are the sole responsible for our actions and the streamers are not to blame for showing their videos, we just need to know those happens once in so long, those videos.

[ultrloa]

If YouTube influencers can fake their videos and edit them just to show how lucky they are, livestreamers can also use sponsored accounts or virtual balances. Still, I think that whether they use real money or not, they share everything in real time, and they show that gambling is not easy and is actually risky. this presents a more realistic perspective of the industry compared to edited YouTube videos that discuss only positive experiences and big fortunes made. What do you think?

If people just really have due diligence to figure out what's happening with videos they are seeing. Also know how to split the reality to fantasy for sure they will never get fooled by those streamers.

But there are fools blinded by fake gains made by those streamers and Youtube content creator thinking that they can also hit those big wins that can change their life instantly.

If they try to act smart and don't listen to those people which intention is to promote the casino they are dealing or having partnership for sure that they will never get fooled by them. Better to take everything lightly and stick with reality so that they won't lose huge money when they want to gamble and have fun in the casino.

[Charles-Tim]

If people just really have due diligence to figure out what's happening with videos they are seeing. Also know how to split the reality to fantasy for sure they will never get fooled by those streamers.

But there are fools blinded by fake gains made by those streamers and Youtube content creator thinking that they can also hit those big wins that can change their life instantly.
when they want to gamble and have fun in the casino.

Some people are just fools, until they learn, they will not understand. Was it last month or last two months that someone sued Drake? Just because he thought the way Drake promoted Stake, he thinks he can make money from gambling. The person lost huge amount of money. So he sued Drake because of his own stupidity. It is called gambling and betting. Where did he think the gambling sites are able to pay their works and maintain their sites.

[robelneo]

They have a share, but it's on the player if he ends up addicted to gambling. These Livestreamers and YouTubers have been exposed as liars and manipulators, so if you still believe what they are saying, then you have an issue with how you gamble.
We all have to be responsible whenever we gamble, because we are the ones betting and depositing.
These promoters will tempt you to play, but the sole decision is on you; if you have no control, then you are doomed to fall for it.

[joeperry]

this presents a more realistic perspective of the industry compared to edited YouTube videos that discuss only positive experiences and big fortunes made. What do you think?

Both of them actually were responsible, no matter if it's edited or not, they still both encouraging people to gamble or trying to promote the platform. It's true that in Youtube they sometimes edit it and show the highlights or their big wins but in livestreams there's a live interaction with the player and the watchers and they can see the winnings in real time and they might be thinking that they might get lucky too. So in reality, it doesn't matter which because they have their own niche and market but both are encouraging people to play.

[death69]

Neither. Both. The question is already rigged. You're asking which format is "more responsible" for addiction like you would be choosing between two poisons on the basis of the aesthetics of the label. Livestreamers show losses in real time - sure great, very authentic - except the account's loaded with house money and they're getting paid whether they win or lose.

YouTubers cut together their content into highlights reels. We know this. Everyone knows this. The platform, itself, is the product and we're all entering into a massive behavioral experiment where the house always wins twice. Once from the gambler, once from the advertiser that is paying to get to the gambler.

The "realism" of livestreaming isn't what makes it less dangerous, it makes it more insidious because now there's parasocial attachment. You don't have a commercial on anymore. You're watching your "friend" hit, and when he/she hits, you feel it. They lose, and you think "I would've stopped earlier" or "I would've bet different." Either way, you're playing your own session in your head.

Addiction doesn't care about what the format is. It is concerned with access, repetition, and normalizing risk as entertainment. It is a beautiful thing that both formats do, just through different mechanisms. Livestreamers provide you with the illusion of community and fast decision-making; YouTubers provide you with the illusion of tactical and patterns of success.

[TypoTonic]

Both of them actually were responsible, no matter if it's edited or not, they still both encouraging people to gamble or trying to promote the platform. It's true that in Youtube they sometimes edit it and show the highlights or their big wins but in livestreams there's a live interaction with the player and the watchers and they can see the winnings in real time and they might be thinking that they might get lucky too. So in reality, it doesn't matter which because they have their own niche and market but both are encouraging people to play.

But the thing is, the people aren't forced to watch. They can just simply ignore or skip these gambling livestreams/youtube videos. But if they choose to watch it, then it's their own fault. Their viewers also aren't forced to play. If their viewers decide to start playing, then it's their own choice and responsibility. No one else is to be blamed other than themselves if they get addicted to gambling. Just like if you introduce someone to Bitcoin, it's their decision if they want to invest or trade, and you shouldn't be blamed for their loss.

[maydna]

Both are responsible for gambling addiction. But that depends on the viewer because if they have a strong mind and self control, they will not become addicted and just see gambling as entertainment. They will not follow those influencers who play gambling but just watch the show.

They realize the risk so they don't want to take it. Those who watch the livestream should not think that making money from gambling is easy. No guarantee they will win easily so they don't have to chase it and waste their money. If they want to playing gambling, they must have strong self control so they can avoid addiction.

[alegotardo]

If YouTube influencers can fake their videos and edit them just to show how lucky they are, livestreamers can also use sponsored accounts or virtual balances. Still, I think that whether they use real money or not, they share everything in real time, and they show that gambling is not easy and is actually risky. this presents a more realistic perspective of the industry compared to edited YouTube videos that discuss only positive experiences and big fortunes made. What do you think?

Both!!
They are responsible for irresponsibly increasing people's exposure to gambling (without generalizing), they normalize gambling and are certainly a very strong trigger for those who are already vulnerable. Advertising and marketing for gambling greatly increases the risk of addiction when these digital influencers create all this artificial glamour about unrealistic and easy winnings that online games can provide.

But, if I had to choose a side, I think the edited YouTube videos are worse because they remove the losses, hide the boredom and only show the good part of the jackpots... they create the false reality of always winning; it's deceptive advertising.

Livestreams, on the other hand, seem more honest because they show entire sessions. The problem is when they do this with demo accounts, sponsorship from the betting site itself, or other "tricks" to deceive the viewer.

Unfortunately, there is not much that can be done... everyone needs to know what they are watching and be able to differentiate reality from illusion.

[Felicity_Tide]

Which one is responsible for gambling addiction: Livestreamers or Youtubers?

From the definition of responsible, I think the both of them play a huge role, but are they to take the blame?, I don't think so. They promote what they are told and they get paid for it. That's their own way of earning a living and I honestly don't see a problem with that if the government doesn't declare it illegal. The casinos and gambling platforms needs people who are closer to the people. You don't expect them to use their own staffs for promotion. People who eventually becomes addicts, probably after getting enticed by their favourite celebrity, should take all the blames. I clearly see no reason why a full grown adult should get easily enticed by wins that are not real. Just because these people encourage you doesn't mean you should attempt it. We all have a choice at some point.

There are certain things that so many of us here wouldn't attempt, no matter the celebrity or influencer that encourages it. Example is smoking. Everyone clearly understands the danger, and a lot of people wouldn't attempt it no matter how enticing it is. That's a total responsibility if you ask me. Which makes gambling not in anyway different, even though those who promote also have a hand in it.

[rat03gopoh]

The danger is that influencers may simply be trying to lure you into playing at a particular casino, and they have nothing directly to do with causing addiction. You might realize their big wins aren't real after playing at the casino they referred you to, which doesn't yield similar wins. Unless you're fundamentally indifferent to the signals of every loss and believe the influencer is being reasonable, you'll start betting impulsively. Addiction is the accumulation of persistent, unconscious patterns of impulsive betting.

[Cointxz]

If YouTube influencers can fake their videos and edit them just to show how lucky they are, livestreamers can also use sponsored accounts or virtual balances. Still, I think that whether they use real money or not, they share everything in real time, and they show that gambling is not easy and is actually risky. this presents a more realistic perspective of the industry compared to edited YouTube videos that discuss only positive experiences and big fortunes made. What do you think?

We shouldn’t blame gambling addiction to any of them since they are just doing gambling content while they are not a financial or gambling advisor that people should follow.

People become addicted to gambling because of their own greediness when playing games. Youtuber/influencer doesn’t dictate players on their financial decisions when gambling.

[bakasabo]

Is there really big difference between people who livestream casino or those who upload gaming process on youtube? Their goal is identical, to promote casino brand by showing how they play there. For me they identically try to drag people into gambling industry, because they both show how easy they win, get rich and show off how they spend money. Their approach to providing information is different, but final goal is the same.

[Cgrexp]

Those who cannot imagine reality with the videos are the ones who believe the streamers. And blinded by greed, they want to achieve big wins. If a person has self-control over himself, then he will never get addicted to it. Those who are aware of the risks will not want to enter it just by watching the livestream. And those who are not aware of the risks and are irresponsible consider gambling a natural and easy way to earn money. However, there is no point in blaming only live streamers and YouTubers for addiction. Self-control and a strong mentality are also needed. Live streamers or YouTubers do promotional work in exchange for money. So you have to keep self-control in your head and remember that you have to take responsibility for your own financial decisions.

[Agbe]

I don't see any of those things encouraging or motivating someone to be addicted but what really  making people to be addicted is the their winning and losing. When a gambler wins, he would be motivated to gamble more and more and when he loses, he would like to chase his lose to win back the loss. And that make the person to be addicted. I only see those influencers in the social media when I am scrolling down the pages and not because those streamers or influencers that I would be visiting those channels.

[Finestream]

What are you talking about? Why blame them for gambling addiction?

We’re the ones who should control ourselves. The people promoting through those platforms are just doing their job because they’re paid, or they’re affiliates. Casinos are given licenses, which means they’re allowed to operate. You can’t blame them if some people end up addicted. That’s the result of someone’s own actions, not the casino’s or promoters.

[Iroh]

How about a third option? Ourselves.. it seems it's way easier and convenient to lay the blame at someone's feet rather than own up to our mistakes.  Livestreamers and so called influencers on YouTube shouldn't be blamed even if they're selfishly promoting something while carefully omitting vital information that people would obviously want to know.
We've got ourselves to blame for trusting these "influencers" on what they're trying to sell on their platforms. Also, we've also got ourselves to blame if we fall into addiction while gambling as these so called influencers who, probably introduced you to the activity don't and can't force anyone to play. We mostly do what we want in our own volition and when it doesn't turn out right, seek for someone to put the blame on. It's pitiful.

[Marvelockg]

this presents a more realistic perspective of the industry compared to edited YouTube videos that discuss only positive experiences and big fortunes made. What do you think?

As someone that engages in something like gambling that you are quite aware that it is very risky, you should know better that it is not in your best of interest that you are relying on youtubers and streamers for the decision you hope to make. youtubers are just after getting the views and so they paint a narrative about whatever they are pushing to the public. same is the case with live streamers. at the end, what you ought to do is to make your decisions based on fact you got from a reliable source and not one that is pushed to you by an unreliable medium like the YouTube.

addiction is of a personal making and the rout out of it is still a personal making. pointing hands to external influences that you have the control over is just shying away from taking full responsibility of what you can control.