← Home
Against the Rules · January 14, 2025 · 29m

Episode 9: Framing the Gambler

Michael Lewis looks at the future of sports gambling by speaking with writers in the UK and Australia, where it's more entrenched. He draws parallels to the US's pattern of blaming users for addiction to products like tobacco and opioids, while industries pay scientists to manufacture doubt and delay regulation. The episode uses the framework of 'Merchants of Doubt' to argue that sports betting is on the same path.

This summary was generated from show notes and public descriptions, not from a full transcript review. Details may contain inaccuracies.

Canon

Sports gambling follows the 'merchants of doubt' playbook
The sports betting industry uses tactics similar to tobacco and opioids—funding scientists to create uncertainty and delay regulation.

Highlights

The US peculiarly blames users for addictive products
The US has a distinct pattern of blaming individuals for their addiction rather than regulating the industries that create addictive products.
The future of sports gambling is visible in countries like the UK and Australia
By looking at Great Britain and Australia, where sports gambling is far more entrenched, we can see the trajectory of the US market.
Regulatory failure is by design, not accident
The failure to regulate harmful industries is often not due to incompetence, but because industry advocates deliberately manipulate the regulatory process.

References

Lying for Money: How Legendary Frauds Reveal the Workings of Our WorldDan Daviesmentioned as further reading
Empire of Pain: The Story of the Sackler Family and Purdue PharmaPatrick Radden Keefeparallels between opioid crisis and sports gambling
Merchants of DoubtNaomi Oreskes and Erik Conway (2010)central framework for industry-funded scientific doubt

Misc

The episode connects the sports betting industry to tactics used by tobacco and opioid companies—paying scientists to sow doubt.
Lewis highlights the contrast between the US and other countries where gambling is more entrenched, yet the problems persist.
Was this useful?