AGCOM outlines proposed changes to Italy's gambling advertising guidance

Davide Gallino of AGCOM said the authority's review of its gambling advertising guidelines is meant to redefine the limits of the exclusions from the Dignity Decree ban, not to remove operators' communication options. Gallino is a manager in the discipline, supervision and sanctions office of AGCOM's media services directorate, and he spoke at the SiGMA Central Europe Summit in Rome. The article is dated 3 November 2026.

AGCOM opened a public consultation on 22 October, lasting thirty days, with the possibility of later hearings for interested parties. Gallino said the consultation is open until 22 November. The procedure concerns infotainment, meaning the use of brands linked to gambling operators in information, entertainment and sports communication. According to Gallino, this practice has developed into what the authority regards as advertising overcrowding.

Gallino said the Dignity Decree ban remains the general reference rule. The guidelines the authority adopted in 2019 set out the conditions under which certain forms of communication fall outside the ban. He said that if the guidelines were cancelled, only the Dignity Decree would remain and much of the advertising that exists today could not be carried out. The purpose of the update is not to introduce a new ban but to adjust the scope of the exclusions already recognised.

The starting point of the review is the principle that a brand must be used autonomously. The proposal is to move beyond less structured forms of infotainment, such as a website or digital container that uses the licensee's brand without a real editorial organisation. The authority wants concrete elements showing independence: an independent editorial structure, a responsible editor, regular publication and an editorial line that is defined and verifiable over time. Gallino referred to the criteria used for registration in the Register of Communication Operators (ROC), which AGCOM manages. He said the reference to the register is not intended to add bureaucracy, and that the aim is to establish whether a recognisable, organised editorial activity exists.

Gallino expressly invited operators to take part in the consultation. He said the authority has some ideas that may not fully match the views of the licensees. The authority does not consider the definition of the criteria complete and intends to use the public process to examine possible solutions. Gallino also said advertising overcrowding should be assessed on two parameters: the quantity of messages and their degree of ambiguity.

Gallino argued that if the Court found the Dignity Decree was not notified in time as a technical rule, the law would not automatically lapse. Should the decree actually fall, he said, AGCOM would lose its powers over gambling communication, though he called this only a hypothetical scenario. Gallino recalled that in 2019 AGCOM had already pointed to a structural problem: a minimum penalty of €50,000, applicable even to conduct of limited gravity, could have consequences out of proportion to the violation. In his account, the Constitutional Court essentially took on board a weakness that AGCOM had already reported to the Government. He also explained that AGCOM's supervisory work has gradually come to cover digital platforms, after an initial phase focused mainly on individual content creators.