… consider the silliness surrounding the debate over lottery advertising, as described this morning in the News & Observer.
Addressing complaints about recent ads, readers encountered this statement:
“We take our lottery law and responsibility for advertising very seriously,” said Alice Garland, the lottery’s executive director. “No ad concept goes forward unless an internal team agrees that the concept is not enticing.”
Um, if it’s not enticing, why would you run the ad? Aren’t you just wasting money if the ad does nothing to entice people to play the game?
Of course, Alice Garland must make a statement of that sort because of the bizarre lottery law, which permits advertising … only if the advertising doesn’t do what advertising is designed to do. Later in the article, Garland adds another comment that makes a bit more sense:
Garland said it should be remembered that the lottery is competing for people’s discretionary money.
“We see advertising as critical to the success of a sales organization, which is what we are,” Garland said.
None of this should surprise anyone who has read the John Locke Foundation’s take on the lottery:
The North Carolina Education Lottery was born of corruption, from its inception as a bill, to its lobbying, to its suspiciously rushed enactment, to its false promise to and exploitation of the state’s poorest citizens.
There’s an easy way to rid the state of lottery ads that prove too successful: Get rid of the lottery itself.
