EU law says that monopoly is legal if it can be justified.
ECJ have ruled in favour of the member states gambling monopoly several times. And Norway has not been told to change their regulation as other have. Therefor the monopoly is legal, and should be respected.
They would not break any rules at all, because the TV-channels they are referring to is Norwegian. TV3.no, Viasat4.no, tlcnorge.no, tv6norge.no, fem.no, max.no, vox.no and discoverychannel.no. All the gambling advertisements have the Norwegian language and Norwegian text.
The Norwegian state owned operator would not be banned. The legal and illegal cant be compared. They do not advertise the same games.
Total advertisements on tv from 1.August 2014 to 31.July 2015 from the state owned gambling operator was 45.246, from other eu-lisenced operators was 578.736...
Member of the EU or not, they should respect national law no matter what.
I'm afraid they ARE respecting national law, ours if they are based in the UK.
Why doesn't the Norwegian government take court action to ban the adverts from clearly targeting Norwegian customers by having the language and text in Norwegian. It can be argued that if they can insert ads specifically aimed at the Norwegian market, they can insert ones compliant with Norwegian advertising regulations. I thought this was channels in English that Norwegians were able to access, rather than bespoke channels being made specifically for Norwegian consumption.
If the EU has stated that the Norwegian position is legal, why doesn't it order other countries to respect EU law that states this?
There IS regulation of TV in the UK, but I would suspect those Norwegian channels have benefitted from a bit of commercial ducking and diving designed to place them "offshore" despite being "based in the UK", and thus beyond the reach of UK regulators as well as Norwegian regulators.
It's more common for big companies to go "offshore" to avoid paying tax, even though they are physically based in the UK they incorporate in a tax haven using a maildrop as their registered offices with a structure that moves all the profits offshore, and all the tax losses stay in the UK.
The motive of course is money, these gambling companies pay big money to advertise and sponsor sports, and they want value for that money by having their branding and advertising on TV as much as possible.
I am not sure that Discovery Channel is even British, I think it's parent is based in the US, but it's output is redistributed through satellite TV providers like SKY. The UK has struggled to get SKY to play by the rules more so than with the land based TV channels. The problem is that SKY transmits from space, rather than any one country. It's like getting tax out of Amazon or Facebook, it's a struggle for the government and often they have to resort to cutting a deal, rather than imposing the regulations and the law.
Other countries have resorted to blocking the websites of online gambling firms that flout local regulations as they have found they are powerless to make them behave otherwise where they are based wholly offshore. The mighty US has STILL not managed to prevent online gambling companies from taking US customers, and cannot do much to prevent internet and email based advertising either.
Maybe you could catch these channels breaking UK regulations, such as advertising gambling before 9pm or showing adverts that are likely to appeal to children. The UK will act against breaches of it's own regulations, and this may work even if the adverts were not in English and not directed at English speakers. If you want to get them to change, you will have to be as crafty as they have been in sidestepping the rules laid down in Norway.
A surprisingly large number of online gambling sites have fallen foul of UK advertising rules, but it's only begun to bite them now that they need a UK licence as well as their primary one. It means that even if what they do is OK in, say, Malta, they could still lose their UK licence and a big chunk of their customer base if they repeatedly flout the UK regulations.
The problem might be that like the US, Norway has opted for blanket prohibition, whereas the UK has opted for licencing and regulation. Where there is blanket prohibition, companies have nothing to gain by sticking to the rules, so they will flout whatever rules will deliver more profit than the cost of sidestepping attempts at enforcement. In the UK, they have been allowed in, and there is a significant cost to breaking our rules that will see them kicked out and their UK licence revoked. This would make it much harder for them to hang on to their UK market share, and they will also be competing with those allowed to operate here. In Norway, they are only competing against the state supplier, and in most of America, there is no legal competition at all.
The experience for UK players when our regulations came into force was that the illegal firms pushed and shoved their way through the exit, many ditching their UK players long before they had to. In the US by contrast, they dug their heels in for as long as possible, and the best that could be done was to deter them by seizing as much of their money as possible in order to disrupt their service and make players afraid to trust their money to them.
It's mostly the offshore rogues that still accept UK customers without having a UK licence. Even the good RTG casinos pulled out of the UK, yet some STILL do their best to stick it out in the US illegal black market.
When it comes to gambling advertising on television in the UK, what is the "rule" when it comes to airtime? Since gambling shouldn't be displayed for children, is there a gambling ad showing every hour of the day, or is it just in the evening? 
I also played bingo at a similar age, and won £5 at my first attempt
