Deal or No Deal faces Gambling Commission probe as top TV gameshows face crackdown
- ITV'S Red or Black? presented by Ant and Dec also hit by investigation
- It's illegal to run non-skill games for money without gambling licence
- Show bosses are bewildered and one source brands probe 'ridiculous'
Some of Britain’s most popular TV game shows could be forced off the air after regulators launched a probe into whether they constitute gambling.
Producers of Noel Edmonds’ hugely successful Deal Or No Deal on Channel 4 have been shocked to be told by the Gambling Commission that their £250,000 jackpot games could be breaking the law because they do not involve any element of skill.
ITV’s Red Or Black?, the £1 million a-night game show presented by Ant and Dec, and developed by Simon Cowell, is also understood to have been hit by the investigation.
Producers of Noel Edmonds' hugely successful Deal Or No Deal on Channel 4 have been shocked to be told by the Gambling Commission that their £250,000 jackpot games could be breaking the law
Meanwhile ITV plans to revive Bruce Forsyth’s perennial hit Play Your Cards Right have also been put on ice pending the outcome of the probe.
It is against the law to run non-skill games for money without a gambling licence – raising the extraordinary prospect of producers being jailed if they defy the warning.
Last night, one legal expert said that in order to comply with a licence, Deal Or No Deal could be forced to move to a time slot after the 9pm watershed, it could also face tight restrictions on the type of advertising allowed to be sold in the commercial breaks and the amount of pre-broadcast publicity it could receive.
ITV plans to revive Bruce Forsyth's perennial hit Play Your Cards Right have also been put on ice pending the outcome of the probe
Channel 4 may then decide it would be simpler to cancel the show, than be constrained by so many restrictions.
The programme, which has been presented by Edmonds since it was first broadcast in 2005, regularly attracts an audience of more than four million in its afternoon slot.
Viewers watch as contestants guess which of 22 identical sealed boxes contains the show’s elusive jackpot in what programme makers Endemol say is a contest of ‘instinct, gut feeling and luck’.
As boxes are opened, contestants decide whether to accept a cash offer from the mysterious Banker, or play on in the hope of increasing the offer, while running the risk of receiving a much lower prize.
However, a Government source told The Mail on Sunday: ‘The Gambling Commission does not seem to think that there is any skill element to the show.
‘Even though at the beginning of the show, contestants do not have to stake any of their own money, the argument is that once they’ve picked a box, which could contain a lot of cash, in subsequent rounds they are in effect gambling with their own money,’
Separately, the Commission is also understood to have raised issues over Red Or Black?, where contestants win £1 million on the spin of a wheel.
The Commission has told the programme makers that the participants need to show more skill in winning the top prize to escape the need for a gaming licence – which would mean the end of the crucial roulette wheel. Regulators are also said to be concerned about the way the show ‘glamorises’ gambling.
ITV's Red Or Black?, the £1 million a-night game show presented by Ant and Dec, and developed by Simon Cowell, is also understood to have been hit by the investigation
The Mail on Sunday also understands that ITV is shelving plans to bring back the popular Eighties quiz show Play Your Cards Right, in which prizes are determined on the turn of a card, for the same reason.
Last night the move was met with bewilderment among game show bosses, who argue that rules created to control casinos and illegal betting should not be applied to entertainment programmes.
ITV's Red Or Black? was developed by Simon Cowell
One senior broadcasting source, who has been fighting the probe behind the scenes, said: ‘This is an absolutely ridiculous state of affairs.
‘The Gambling Commission has no right to be poking its nose into what are harmless television programmes.
'How can anyone regard Deal Or No Deal as gambling?
'It is probably the most innocent show on television. I think its very telling that this programme is aired in 30 different countries but only in Britain has this become an issue.
‘You also have to look it from the point of broadcaster. They are already heavily regulated by Ofcom. Why on earth would they want to also come under the control of the Gambling Commission as well?
'That means they would be answerable to two different regulators who would be looking into its affairs. The people who make Deal Or No Deal want to operate as a television production company not a casino.’
Simon Cowell’s spokesman, Max Clifford, said: ‘Simon wants to come up with the most exciting combination he can which remains within the rules. His view is that it is a light entertainment programme with a gambling element – not what the Commission is claiming.’
As well as restrictions on scheduling, advertising and trailers, any TV company whose shows fell under gambling rules would also need to prove to the Commission that its executives had an understanding of the complex laws and regulations surrounding the betting industry. This could force them to team up with a gambling company in order to employ the relevant expertise.
The expert said: ‘The gambling industry is the most stringently regulated industry in the UK because of the capacity for high level organised crime.
‘The Gambling Commission wants to make sure these shows are not enticing people to go out and gamble recklessly, and some programmes may fall into this category in their current format.
BRITAIN'S MOST EXPENSIVE - AND MOST CONTENTIOUS - GAME SHOW
Red Or Black? was launched in a blaze of publicity by ITV and Simon Cowell’s SycoTV production company last September.
With a £15million budget it was the most expensive game show ever devised – and producers assumed it would be a ratings smash.
However, it struggled to find an audience and, five months on there are doubts whether the show will ever return to the screen.
Producers are understood to be locked in talks with the Gambling Commission about whether the show can return in its existing format or whether it needs to be revamped.
One suggestion is that the show’s roulette wheel, which decides whether contestants leave as millionaires, may not return.
The row over gambling is the latest controversy to hit the show, which was devised by Cowell personally.
Last year, it emerged that Nathan Hageman, the winner of the show’s first £1 million prize, had a conviction for assaulting a woman, sparking demands for the prize to be withdrawn.
Three other contestants were subsequently pulled out of show and at least one of these had a criminal record.
Cowell had hope the show would replicate the success of his other programmes including Britain’s Got Talent and the X Factor.
Its opening night audience of almost seven million was respectable, but did not come close to the ten million which had been predicted. Subsequent episodes would attract less than four million viewers.
The show also controversially provided a showcase for some of Cowell’s music acts, including X Factor winner Leona Lewis.
ITV has still yet to announce a second series but the broadcaster and Syco are in talks.
Last night, ITV insisted that its return had not been delayed by the Gambling Commission.
A spokesman said: ‘A decision will be made on a second series of Red Or Black? in due course.’
‘If a TV company was unwilling to change the format then they could be forced into a range of moves which would effectively kill off the show altogether.
‘The problem is this is an extremely complex area that is in danger of encroaching on harmless family entertainment. It will undoubtedly be a case of compromise for the shows in question, but if the Commission aren’t careful, we could see the end of several popular family game shows.’
A spokesman for the Gambling Commission refused to comment, saying it never talks about ‘individual’ cases.
However, he confirmed that the Commission was about to publish new guidance for television game shows.
He said: ‘In the first instance, we would contact the operator to discuss the situation, as compliance is always preferable over enforcement action.’
The Commission, which was set up as the independent regulator under the Gambling Act 2005, is required to keeping crime out of gambling, ensure gambling is conducted fairly and openly and protect children and vulnerable people from being harmed or exploited by gambling.
The spokesman declined to say how much a television company would have to pay for a gambling operating licence.
However, based on a formula linked to company turnover and published on the Commission’s website, a permit would probably cost about £60,000 to apply for, with annual renewals costing about £30,000.
Dr Mark Griffiths, professor of gambling studies at Nottingham Trent University, said that, in his opinion, Deal Or No Deal, did involve gambling.
He said: ‘The bottom line is, contestants in the show are effectively gambling. The show producers will say that the people on it are not putting up any of their own money. But once they are on it, they have been given money and it’s their money they are gambling on.’
Dr Griffiths said that a TV show that had to operate with a gaming licence should be moved to a later slot in the television schedules.
‘Gambling is an adult activity so it should go out after the 9pm watershed in my view.’
Dr Griffiths added that he had been urging the Gambling Commission to look into television game shows for some time, saying: ‘For some years, there’s been a blurring between gambling and gaming. I am very pleased they’re looking into this.’
Last night, a Channel 4 spokesman said: ‘Channel 4 has been contacted by the Gambling Commission about the popular long running series Deal Or No Deal. It would not be appropriate to comment further at this time.’
A source at the channel added: ‘People are very worried. The producers don’t want to be tarred with the gambling brush’.
ITV refused to comment.
