Beyond the fine: Philippine marketers face tougher questions over influencer-led gambling

The Philippine Amusement and Gaming Corporation (PAGCOR) has imposed a 1 million pesos (US$16,000) fine on a gambling firm for sponsoring influencer Ivana Alawi’s giveaway of 100 iPhones without obtaining the regulator’s approval, putting renewed scrutiny on the responsibilities of brands, creators and agencies in the country’s rapidly growing influencer economy.

The penalty comes as influencer marketing faces broader questions across Southeast Asia. In Indonesia, controversy surrounding creator Bigmo and an alleged vape promotion involving minors has similarly raised concerns about the role of creators in promoting products associated with health and social risks.

In the Philippines, however, the PAGCOR action has brought a more specific question into focus: when influencer campaigns involve regulated or potentially harmful categories, who should be accountable?

For the Creator and Influencer Council of the Philippines (CICP), responsibility cannot sit with creators alone, but creators cannot simply wash their hands of the consequences either.

“Creators can no longer say, ‘I just took the campaign. What people do after that is their own choice.’ It doesn’t quite work that way anymore,” the council told MARKETING-INTERACTIVE.

Creators have built trust and communities over years, it added, meaning audiences increasingly expect them to demonstrate integrity alongside their influence.

Whether intentional or not, creators influence decisions. They are one of the platforms that shape what people buy, try, or believe, and audiences recognise that.

Don't miss: Consumer backlash ushers in an era of accountability for influencer marketing

The issue came into sharper focus after Alawi, who has previously been disclosed as a brand ambassador for Casino Plus, purchased 100 iPhone 17 Pro Max units worth around 4.28 million pesos (US$69,000) for the giveaway. Prospective winners were asked to follow her “CP Fam” and comment on a designated post to qualify.

Beyond ‘is it legal?’

The controversy has also highlighted the distinction between legal compliance and ethical responsibility.

CICP said creators should consider more than whether a partnership is legally permissible, particularly when promoting services that could carry financial or social risks.

“The question isn’t just, ‘Can I promote this?’ but also, ‘Should I promote this to my audience?’”

Using gambling as an example, the council said its concern is not whether adults choose to gamble, but whether creator endorsements could encourage people to gamble with money they cannot reasonably afford to lose.

“The same 1,000 pesos can mean very different things to different people - entertainment money for one person, but groceries, medicines, or rent for another.”

Angeli Jane Blanco, director of public relations at ODV Creative Media, said the expectations placed on creators have evolved alongside the professionalisation of influencer marketing.

“Creators are no longer viewed simply as individuals sharing their personal preferences. Once they monetise their followers’ trust, they are increasingly regarded as commercial actors with a corresponding duty of care.”

That duty becomes greater when products involve public health, financial risk or vulnerable audiences, she said.

Promoting an ordinary consumer product is not equivalent to promoting vaping or gambling, which may involve addiction, age restrictions, and potentially serious health or financial consequences.

Accountability goes beyond the creator

For CICP president Jel Directo, focusing solely on the influencer risks overlooking how campaigns are developed and distributed.

“I don’t think accountability should rest solely with creators because every element in the ecosystem serves a role in creating accountability.”

Brands, agencies and other intermediaries can influence which campaigns are offered, how they are structured and how much creators are paid.

“If the industry itself is placing significantly greater value on certain campaigns, then it also recognises that there is something about those campaigns that requires greater consideration.”

As a result, governance should begin before a creator accepts a campaign.

“It should also begin with how brands, agencies, talent managers, and platforms think about the campaigns they create, approve, and distribute.”

Blanco similarly argued that high-risk creator activity should be treated as advertising regardless of whether it appears in a conventional ad format.

“Particularly in high-risk industries, any compensated or incentivised creator activity should be treated as advertising regardless of format, with clear disclosure, prior review, audience safeguards, monitoring, and accountability shared by the brand, agency, platform, and creator.”

The changing face of advertising

The challenge is partly driven by the nature of creator marketing itself.

Traditional advertising is generally recognisable as paid communication. Creator-led promotions, meanwhile, can be woven into entertainment, giveaways, livestreams and community interactions.

In Alawi’s case, the commercial activity was embedded in a giveaway that encouraged audience participation, illustrating how promotional mechanics can become part of a creator’s regular content.

Blanco said this makes commercial influence harder to separate from authentic engagement.

“This makes it more difficult to determine whether a creator’s enthusiasm is genuine, commercially influenced, or both.”

She added that disclosures identify the financial relationship but do not remove the trust and familiarity that make influencer endorsements effective.

The promotion is built into the entertainment where audiences are not merely shown an advertisement but are invited to watch, react, participate, and share.

This creates challenges for regulators because creator content can be fluid, appearing across livestreams, stories, comments, links, giveaways and edited clips.

“Regulators must therefore decide not only what an advertisement says, but where the advertisement begins and ends,” Blanco said.

Reputation is becoming part of the calculation

For creators, meanwhile, commercial decisions are increasingly being evaluated through the lens of long-term reputation.

Local influencer Carol Hamilton, who has a background in journalism and PR, said creators are becoming more conscious of what partnerships say about their personal brands.

“A few years ago, creators often asked, ‘How much does it pay?’ Today, many are also asking, ‘How will this affect my brand in the long run?’”

Hamilton said a campaign may last weeks, but the reputational impact can last much longer.

Her approach is to consider whether she believes in the product, whether it fits her audience and whether she would remain comfortable being associated with it years later.

“Money comes and goes, but credibility compounds over time.”

The shift could push creators to become more selective as audiences become increasingly critical of commercial partnerships.

I’d rather have fewer partnerships that genuinely reflect who I am than many that leave people questioning my judgment.

Raising the industry standard

CICP believes these developments reinforce the need for clearer ethical standards alongside regulation, pointing to its own code of ethics as one framework for creators and the wider industry.

At the centre, it said, should be transparency, integrity and responsibility.

“Legal compliance should be the minimum standard, not the only standard.”

Directo acknowledged that disagreements will remain over products that are legal but carry potential social or public health risks.

“The law draws the line between what is legal and illegal. Ethics doesn’t always stop there.”

For the council, the solution is not simply to place more responsibility on creators, but to establish shared standards across the ecosystem.

“We believe creators, brands, agencies, and platforms all share the responsibility of building and maintaining public trust.”

As PAGCOR’s fine puts the spotlight on the consequences of an influencer-led gambling promotion, the Philippine creator economy faces a broader test: whether the trust that makes creators commercially valuable can be matched by the safeguards expected of increasingly influential commercial actors.

From AI-powered marketing and the friction economy to retention-led growth, DMA Philippines 2026 on 29 September in Manila will bring together marketers to tackle the opportunities and challenges shaping the next phase of digital transformation.

Related articles:
Indonesia probes YouTuber Bigmo over alleged involvement of minors in vape promotion
PAGCOR reports 49% income drop after eWallet platforms cut gambling links
Gambling ad billboards are coming down in the Philippines, but the real fight remains online