Safer by Design: How iGaming Marketing’s Most Powerful Strategy Became Slowing Down

Frictionless Journeys: Yesterday’s Playbook

Throughout the rise of digital gambling, iGaming operators pursued what seemed like enlightened customer service: eliminating every barrier between interest and action. eliminating every barrier between interest and action. One-click sign-up. Rapid onboarding. Generous welcome bonuses. Accelerated play cycles. Loyalty rewards tied to session frequency, not player wellbeing.
Personalized algorithms learned each player’s weak points—the times they were most likely to deposit, the games that held them longest, the bonuses that triggered the fastest response.

Marketing teams weaponized persuasion principles: reciprocity through free bets, commitment through loyalty programs, and social proof through influencer endorsement. The result was a machine optimized for one thing: extracting maximum lifetime value from each player. Acquisition costs mattered less than retention rates. Player satisfaction was measured by session length and deposit frequency, not by whether players could afford their bets or were spiraling toward addiction.

Bonus-driven betting journeys made gambling feel effortless—instant gifts, one-click bets, and glowing rewards—while quietly training players to react to incentives rather than reflect on risk.

The Recognition: When Frictionless Becomes Harmful

Between 2023 and 2025, something shifted in how regulators, operators, and researchers perceived the gap between business optimization and player harm. The question was no longer whether iGaming marketing was effective at driving engagement—it clearly was. The question became: at what cost?
Decision fatigue research showed that players exposed to thousands of marketing messages daily were experiencing cognitive overload and riskier choices. Academic studies linked AI-driven personalization and rapid reward cycles to longer play sessions and altered risk perception. Behavioral research confirmed what treatment specialists had long observed: the frictionless environment that operators had engineered was precisely the environment that amplified harm for vulnerable players.
Spain’s regulatory approach illustrated the shift. Rather than relying on operator goodwill, Spain’s national monitoring system—currently in development—will incorporate over 60 behavioral and transactional indicators to detect and intervene in high-risk gambling journeys before they escalate. Other jurisdictions followed. Germany, Italy, the UK, and Scandinavia began mandating AI-based risk detection. The old assumption—that operators would self-regulate—collapsed.
Simultaneously, research from players themselves revealed an unexpected finding: the majority did not want frictionless play.

When asked, 75% of iGaming customers identified responsible gambling tools as essential for building trust and loyalty. Non-problem and recreational players, far from being driven away by friction, reported higher satisfaction with platforms that embedded protective features visibly and communicated their value. The frictionless ideal, it turned out, was an operator preference, not a player preference.

The paradox was clear: the formula that maximized short-term profit was eroding long-term brand trust and creating genuine player harm.

The Response: Friction by Design

Between 2024 and 2025, Europe’s leading licensed operators began embedding friction not as a regulatory burden, but as a strategic differentiator. Spend dashboards, deposit caps, and session timers appeared as baseline features, not hidden options. Risk detection algorithms now flag binge sessions, prompt cooling-off periods, and enforce pre-set limits. Enhanced KYC processes and proactive guardrails became visible markers of ethical leadership.
The data reflected this shift. The European Gaming and Betting Association reported that 65–69% of customers of its member operators—representing Europe’s largest licensed gambling companies—actively used safer gambling tools in 2024, a record high. Operators working with AI specialists like Mindway AI and RG certification bodies are increasingly positioning friction as a core brand value, not a compliance checkbox. Regulators responded by rewarding this shift. Licensing advantages, public recognition, and favorable media treatment flowed to operators demonstrating transparent, effective protection mechanisms. The message was unmistakable: friction, when designed thoughtfully and communicated clearly, was now a competitive advantage.

Yet here emerged another paradox. Friction worked—but only when implemented with transparency and genuine player buy-in. In highly restrictive regulatory environments, particularly Finland’s proposed 2027 Gambling Act with its mandatory pre-play deposit limits and aggressive behavioral surveillance, players reported feeling monitored rather than protected. Some expressed concerns about privacy and data misuse. In response, a segment of players gravitated toward unlicensed, offshore operators that offered frictionless play without surveillance.

Swedish data made the pattern clear: 37–68% of self-excluded players circumvented their legal exclusion by gambling on unlicensed sites. UK traffic patterns showed unlicensed betting sites growing 522% (unique visitors) between 2021–2024, while legal operators grew only 49%. Across the EU, unlicensed operators captured 71% of online gambling revenue in 2024.
The lesson was painful: friction, when stripped of transparency and player choice, doesn’t just push players away—it pushes them toward unlicensed operators, undoing the very protections it aimed to create.

“Circular ‘Customer Journey Mapping with friction’ diagram showing an iGaming player’s path from start and onboarding through gameplay, community, risk assessment and protection measures, highlighting friction points and ending in reward.

Advertising’s New Standard: The Paradox Deepens

Advertising’s New Standard: The Paradox Deepens
The advertising sector moved decisively in 2023–2024 to embed safer gambling messaging as a regulatory requirement. The BGC mandated that at least 20% of all TV, radio, and digital gambling ads include responsible gambling messaging—a significant extension from previous practice.

Yet a 2025 GambleAware study found something unexpected and troubling: operator-created “safer gambling” campaigns may actually increase gambling behavior, particularly among younger and vulnerable audiences. The ads, by framing gambling as something that “can be done safely,” inadvertently reinforced the perception that gambling itself is “harmless fun” and created false security. Players who viewed these campaigns reported higher intent to gamble than control groups.
The paradox deepened when data was viewed in context. UK gambling advertising spend reached £1.5 billion annually by 2025. Premier League gambling advertising tripled between 2023–2025. Yet official problem gambling prevalence held steady at 2.5% of the adult population.

As Professor Mark Griffiths has observed in discussion with iGaming Review, the lack of proportional growth in problem gambling despite massive increases in advertising suggests the relationship between ad exposure and harm is more complex than a simple linear model. Some protective factors—regulatory safeguards, awareness campaigns, treatment services—are clearly mitigating. Yet the finding also suggests that industry-led safer gambling messaging may be part performance rather than substance.

Influencers: The Exception and the Rule

Brian Christopher, one of the world’s most-watched casino streamers, represents a minority approach to gambling influencer marketing.
“Authenticity is the new currency, but it’s not a simple game. Audiences are smart and demanding; they want transparency from streamers—they want the fun, but they want the facts too. I only work with compliant operators that support responsible gaming, because trust is everything.” — Brian Christopher, casino streamer
Brian Christopher, one of the world’s most-watched casino streamers, represents a minority approach to gambling influencer marketing.
Christopher prioritizes full financial disclosure, works exclusively with regulated operators, and has declined lucrative partnerships with unregulated platforms—reportedly turning down millions of dollars to maintain integrity. His audience respects this stance; his viewership and loyalty reflect it.
But Christopher is the exception.

In June 2025, Sweden’s Gambling Authority took enforcement action against multiple Twitch influencers promoting unlicensed gambling sites with bonus codes and direct referral links during live streams. EGBA codes and platform guidelines increasingly require influencer disclosure of sponsorships and responsible gambling messaging, yet enforcement is inconsistent. Regulators continue to identify significant compliance violations, particularly on platforms where younger audiences congregate.

The shift toward transparency and trust-building is real among leading voices. It remains aspirational across the broader influencer ecosystem.

What Players Actually Think

Recent surveys and research reveal nuanced player attitudes toward responsible gambling features. An Optimove survey (2023) of 396 U.S. online players found that 75% perceive responsible gambling tools as essential for boosting trust and loyalty. Approximately 90% actively set betting limits, and 97% demonstrate awareness of responsible gambling resources, with 56% actively utilizing them.

Research across Scandinavia and regulated European markets confirms that non-problem and recreational players embrace friction-based features such as deposit limits and session timers when implemented transparently. A German study found the majority held positive attitudes toward monthly deposit limits, viewing them as empowering and helpful for bankroll control.
However, player acceptance depends critically on how restrictions are framed and implemented. In highly restrictive environments—such as Finland’s proposed 2027 Gambling Act, which mandates pre-play deposit limits combined with aggressive behavioral monitoring—research indicates players may perceive such measures as intrusive rather than protective. Some express concerns about privacy and surveillance, particularly when mandatory tracking is implemented without transparency about data use.

A significant minority—particularly high-risk and problem gamblers—consistently prefer friction-free alternatives, often migrating to unlicensed sites. German regulatory data found 42% of players who reached monthly deposit limits attempted to continue gambling on non-compliant operators. Academic research notes that in jurisdictions with particularly strict mandatory restrictions combined with opaque player monitoring, even broader player segments may gravitate toward unregulated platforms. For the wider player population, however, platforms that implement visible protective features transparently and communicate their value build stronger retention, loyalty, and trust.

The Path Forward: Calibration, Not Mandate

The shift from frictionless to friction-by-design is real. But its trajectory is fragile. Adoption of responsible gambling frameworks across European licensed operators is increasing. Yet the core tension remains: effective friction requires data, transparency involves trust, and trust requires genuine player autonomy. When friction is perceived as surveillance without consent, when data flows are opaque, when mandatory restrictions feel like punishment rather than protection—the result is not safer gambling. It is regulatory arbitrage. Players vote with their feet, moving to unlicensed operators that trade safety for freedom.
As a leading gambling researcher recently noted, while sector-wide frameworks like GamProtect and pan-European markers of harm are necessary, practical cooperation between operators, regulators, researchers, and treatment specialists remains inconsistent. Information sharing, genuine data integration, and aligned strategic priorities are rare. The frameworks exist; the collaboration to make them work remains fragile.

The brands that will thrive are those who recognize this tension and navigate it deliberately. They understand that friction by design is not the same as friction by mandate. They invest in transparency about how data is used, why restrictions exist, and what player rights are protected. They balance regulatory compliance with genuine player input. They use AI and data as tools for protection, not just profit—and crucially, they know when to override the algorithm in favor of human judgment and autonomy.

The path forward is neither unregulated innovation nor heavy-handed mandates, but calibrated friction paired with transparency, genuine stakeholder collaboration, and recognition that technology serves protection only when guided by human values.

Conclusion: Three Takeaways

Friction has gone from liability to asset. For a decade, iGaming operators competed on frictionless experience. Today, leading brands compete on protective design. Regulators reward it. Players trust it. The shift is not complete—adoption varies by jurisdiction and company size—but the direction is unmistakable.
Transparency is now the currency of trust. Players embrace friction when they understand why it exists and feel genuine autonomy within it. Players resist friction when it feels like surveillance, when data use is opaque, when restrictions are mandatory without consent. The difference between the two is whether friction is designed with players or imposed upon them.
Technology is only as ethical as the humans who guide it. AI excels at pattern recognition and optimization. It can detect risk, flag interventions, and personalize protections. But algorithms cannot judge whether an intervention serves protection or profits. They cannot weigh player autonomy against safety. They cannot decide whether to override a recommendation in the service of genuine human dignity. These decisions require human judgment, ethical frameworks, and a willingness to sacrifice short-term metrics for long-term trust.

In a market where regulation is tightening, public scrutiny is intensifying, and player expectations are rising, the brands that survive will be those who use design, data, and AI as tools for player protection—not just profit—and know when to let human judgment override the algorithm. The future of iGaming is not frictionless. It is not heavy-handed. It is thoughtfully calibrated, transparently executed, and genuinely collaborative. Whether the industry achieves this at scale remains an open question.

Further Reading