iGaming Ontario shelved a problem gambling study after researchers found rates significantly higher than expected, according to records obtained by the Toronto Star through freedom of information legislation.
The agency commissioned the study before Ontario launched its regulated online sports betting and casino market in April 2022. It had pledged to publish the findings, which were intended to establish a baseline for problem gambling and guide its responsible gambling programmes.
However, internal records suggest executives questioned the results and decided to keep them confidential, The Star reported. Officials also discussed damage-control measures over concerns that researchers might publicly criticise the agency, including a possible “gag order” to limit the risk they would “badmouth” iGaming Ontario.
The records were released after lengthy delays and a successful appeal to the Information and Privacy Commissioner. They were heavily redacted, with the research findings withheld entirely. iGaming Ontario cited potential harm to the province’s economic interests as one reason for withholding information.
Before the market launched, iGaming Ontario invited bids for a two-year study to assess problem gambling prevalence in Ontario. The Responsible Gambling Council (RGC), a charity focused on preventing problem gambling that also runs the province’s required responsible gambling accreditation programme for operators, won the contract.
The longitudinal study was designed to follow the same group of people over two years, with three rounds of data collection. iGaming Ontario had cited the research in internal and external presentations as a key responsible gambling initiative.
In 2024, communications adviser Josh Elliott told The Star that the study would establish a baseline for gambling participation and problem gambling and help the agency adjust its programmes to players’ needs. He said the agency looked forward to sharing the final findings publicly.
The first data collection took place in February 2022, two months before the market opened. Undated meeting notes later described the baseline results as showing “unexpected” problem gambling rates that differed significantly from other research.
The researchers’ use of online survey panels became a point of disagreement. Although widely used in gambling research, online panels can produce higher problem gambling estimates than other methods, potentially because participants spend more time online than the average person.
Meeting notes said iGaming Ontario wanted to add a telephone sample in the second round to determine whether the methodology influenced the results. The agency’s then executive director, Martha Otton, agreed with the approach, according to the notes, which described her as concerned about the findings and uncertain about the research.
In a December 2022 email, iGaming Ontario Senior Manager for Responsible Gambling Melissa Ball told a colleague who requested the first-round data not to share the findings widely because of internal discussions about the baseline study.
The RGC enlisted researchers Iris Balodis of McMaster University and Michael Wohl of Carleton University to help conduct the study. Both belong to the Ontario Gambling Research Society, a small group of academics involved in gambling research.
“Our participation was based on the explicit condition that we publish the findings of the study,” Balodis and Wohl told The Star in a joint statement, noting that the study had received clearance from Carleton University’s Research Ethics Board.
After the first round of data collection, the researchers and the organisations involved disagreed on how to proceed and eventually parted ways, they said.
Records show that in February 2023, Ball sought legal advice on handling the possibility that the researchers had copies of the data. Meeting notes from March referred to attempts to contact Balodis and Wohl and suggested that correspondence from the agency might have reinforced their belief that iGaming Ontario was trying to silence them.
In 2023, iGaming Ontario hired public relations firm Counsel Public Affairs for “strategic planning and reactive messaging” related to the study.
Meeting notes from around September referred to concerns that the researchers might publicly disavow the project. One document questioned whether their involvement needed to be acknowledged and whether a “gag order” was necessary. It also suggested that giving them the data might prevent them from speaking negatively about the agency.
The records indicate that concerns about a possible leak persisted into March 2025. However, Balodis and Wohl do not appear to have publicly released the data.
They later co-authored an article in The Conversation criticising the lack of reliable data on problem gambling in Ontario despite the online gambling industry’s rapid growth and revenue. They also raised concerns about the absence of an independent research body to monitor gambling-related harm in the province.
In an unsigned statement, the RGC said its contract gave iGaming Ontario ownership of the study’s findings and control over whether and when they would be published.
iGaming Ontario said concerns about the methodology meant the study did not meet the standard required to inform policy. Neither organisation disclosed how much taxpayer money was spent on the research.
Ontarians wagered more than $82.7 billion in the 2024-25 fiscal year, with nearly $3 billion going to provincial coffers, according to iGaming Ontario’s latest annual report. Preliminary figures for 2025-26 and the first quarter of 2026-27 showed increases of more than 25% on those totals.
Despite some signs of increased harm, including increased calls to Ontario’s problem gambling help line, Ontario has not publicly studied how legalising online gambling and the accompanying surge in advertising affected problem gambling rates. The research commissioned by iGaming Ontario and later withheld was intended to address these gaps.