www.med.monash.edu charles livingstone dept of health social science school of public health and...
TRANSCRIPT
www.med.monash.edu
Charles LivingstoneDept of Health Social Science
School of Public Health and Preventative Medicine
Power, actors, interests: – whose responsibility is problem gambling?
www.med.monash.edu
2
A few favourites …
www.med.monash.edu
3
Victorian pub venue – the Vegas room …30 EGMs, net ‘gaming’ revenue 2008-09: $4.5 million
www.med.monash.edu
4
Parramatta Leagues Club (NSW):just a local club, really: total annual revenues ~ $60 million
www.med.monash.edu
5
A hypothesis about EGMs…
• What do EGMs sell? Some form of entertainment, for example:– A fantasy about winning money
– A quasi-social experience
– A moment of escape from life’s vicissitudes
• Or: – a commodified stream of indeterminacy
presented and mediated by principles of probability
www.med.monash.edu
6
On ‘responsible gambling’
• “'Responsible gambling' is a carefully structured, if elastic and goalless term, discursively transferring responsibility for industrialized (and normalized) harm production to end users. It would, perhaps, be helpful for harm minimization purposes were it to denote pursuit of the absence of harm by all means. Yet the actually existing category of 'responsible gambling' invariably ignores the EGM system's harm producing capacity.”
– Livingstone & Woolley (2007)
www.med.monash.edu
7
Discourse
• That which enables our subjectivity• Not just a way of speaking:
– what can be said
– what can not be said
– what can be conceived of and materialised
– what is unsayable, inconceivable, immaterial
• But reflexive, constantly altered, never truly stable, and always aligned with the lineaments of power
www.med.monash.edu
8
Discourse - Laclau & Mouffe
• A “discursive structure is not a merely ‘cognitive’ or ‘contemplative’ entity; it is articulatory practice which constitutes and organises social relations”
– Laclau & Mouffe (1985)
• Personally, I think it’s more helpful to think of the materialisations of discourse as systems of relations rather than structures, but who am I to question L&M?
www.med.monash.edu
9
A very simplified social dialectic …(after Bourdieu)
www.med.monash.edu
10
Power
• Is most powerfully articulated when taken for granted … as in the universe of the undiscussed
• May be thought of as orthodox or heterodox– With the heterodox constantly infecting the
orthodox, both to preserve the core of orthodoxy and to address conflict
www.med.monash.edu
11
The discourse of business as usual
• Relies on discursive elements such as: – ‘rational, sovereign consumers’– ‘Responsible gambling’
• And multiple orthodoxies, including:– ‘Only a small proportion of gamblers suffer
harm’– ‘EGMs are safe, people are the problem’– ‘Altering arrangements will reduce enjoyment of
RGs’
www.med.monash.edu
12
Actors, power
Public interest
ResearchersCharities
www.med.monash.edu
13
Upstream, downstream
• Upstream interventions prevent harm– They include legislation, regulation and active
material policies – as with smoking and road safety
– But also include measures assisting individuals (such as pre-commitment)
• Downstream measures treat the consequences of harm– Counselling, self-exclusion etc
www.med.monash.edu
14
‘Responsible gambling’discursive legerdemain!
• Emphasises the individual’s responsibility• Focuses on flawed consumers• Argues that modest education, social
marketing and associated activity will reduce harm– Despite decades of public health evidence to the
contrary
• Is opposed by the discursive figure of the ‘recreational gambler’
www.med.monash.edu
15
Legitimation
• Tax• Charitable and sporting donations• The recreational gambler• And, in Australia, the folk model
www.med.monash.edu
16
The ‘folk model’discursive cleverness par excellence
• Poker machines are simple entertainment products
• They provide amusement in social venues
• They promote community participation
• They collect money for community purposes
• They are not primarily intended as the principle business activity of the venue
• They are not dependent on people with problems – Sadly, all mythology …
www.med.monash.edu
17
System of systems
• System 1: the network of actors, articulating power and interests, relating all elements of the system to all other elements; a social imaginary institution, materialised.
• System 2: the radical imaginary of the subject; interior, imaginary, magmatic, craving connection … to the stream of indeterminacy
www.med.monash.edu
18
What the EGM industry says EGMs do …
Mr Ferrar—The reality of a gaming machine is that, when you plug it in and power it up, it starts generating millions and millions of random numbers. … When you press ‘play’ … the software reaches into this torrent of random numbers, grabs a few and applies those … When we talk about random number generation, we are talking about instantaneous generation of a number by reaching into a gigantic pool … of random numbers.
(Ferrar, evidence to Senate C’tee, 12 Sep 2008)
www.med.monash.edu
19
To remind:
… a commodified stream of indeterminacy presented and mediated by principles of probability …
Or, as Nietzsche out it:We have left the land and have embarked. We have burned our bridges behind us – indeed we have gone farther and destroyed the land behind us. Now, little ship, look out! Beside you is the ocean … hours will come when you realize that it is infinite and that there is nothing more awesome than infinity ...
The Gay Science
www.med.monash.edu
20
So … the EGM gambler as neo-Nietzschean …
• It’s something like reaching into the abyss, a simulacrum of the magma of signification – immersion in possibility, endless connection
• Not a place where humans can easily live … so we paper it over (as Castoriadis says), and invent God to determine it for us …
– (until rational modernity knocked God off, at any rate)
• But the radical imaginary longs for a connection to this well of meaning – to an unmediated ‘reality’, as it were
– Embarked on a sea of awesome infinity
www.med.monash.edu
21
So, who’s responsible?
• Everyone … in interestingly different ways• If the ratiocinating pokie user was a ‘rational’
sovereign consumer, they might be to blame …
– But how much power does the user deploy?• If we allocate responsibility based on power:
– Industry, government, researchers, charities, regulators, and the public at large are all more culpable than users
– And EGMs/networks are very powerful, being the interface, the pathway into a magmatic torrent
www.med.monash.edu
22
What is to be done?
• A sustainable industry is probably achievable
• BUT it needs significant alteration of relations of power,
• AND recognition of the futility of downstream responses
• AND downloaded responsibility
www.med.monash.edu
23
A few people to thank …who’s the odd one out?
www.med.monash.edu
24
Indeterminacy, at a venue near you …(if you live in suburban Australia)