The latest trend in sports media is redrawing already-thin lines between news and entertainment, and the biggest names in the business are leading the charge; outlets like the Wall Street Journal, NBCU and CNN are rushing to take on online sportsbooks and prediction markets as ‘official partners.’ Though companies profiting from fan attempts to guess sports outcomes is nothing new, media outlets’ decisions to align themselves with these platforms could leave their viewers questioning their journalistic integrity and culpability in America’s ongoing gambling addiction crisis.
Dispelling the skepticism brought on by these partnerships is a job for media companies’ public relations specialists. Much like journalists, it’s their job to build and maintain the public’s trust in the institutions they represent. Amid the sportsbook and prediction market craze, these professionals are tasked with assuring audiences that their organizations remain committed to serving the public interest while managing their obligations to commercial partners.
Balancing Partnerships with Public Duty
Last November, ESPN announced its intent to exclusively feature data from DraftKings across its platforms after striking a partnership deal with the online sportsbook.
“Our betting approach has focused on offering an integrated experience within our products. Working with DraftKings, a leader in the space, will allow us to build upon that foundation, continue to super-serve passionate sports fans and grow our ESPN direct-to-consumer business,” stated ESPN Chairman Jimmy Pitaro in a press release.
According to ESPN, once the partnership’s 2026 rollout is complete, fans will be able to “enjoy betting features and access to offerings including DraftKings’ sportsbook, daily fantasy and DraftKings Pick6 at launch.”
According to Director Galen Clavio of the National Sports Journalism Center, deals like these are due in part to advertisers’ migration away from broadcast and news.
“A lot of what we consider to be news coverage and journalism was supported historically by mass media organizations having a virtual monopoly on advertising. Well, you don’t have that anymore,” said Clavio. “If you can’t force advertisers to pay exorbitant amounts of money, then you have to go find partners who will pay you money. Those partners are going to expect an audience in return.”
ESPN’s willingness to offer its audience to DraftKings has the potential to raise eyebrows. As a sportsbook, the platform acts as a ‘bookie’ and stands to make a profit from users’ failure to wager accurately. When users synthesize available facts and data to determine the most likely outcome, how outlets like ESPN frame that information matters.
Elaborating on the tension this creates, Clavio said:
“If your business is generating news and doing reporting, you’re also there to try to keep people on your platform. There are only a limited number of ways you can do that, so it is cyclical. […] You don’t see a ton of dispensaries partnering with news organizations, but you do see a ton of sports wagering operations. The idea is, it’s a source of revenue, and I think media companies are saying, ‘this doesn’t hurt us directly.’”
Because DraftKings stands to profit from any ill-informed wagers its users might make, ESPN’s public relations professionals must continue to assure the public that its partner’s financial success does not affect its dedication to accurate reporting.
Prediction Markets, Public Health and the Law
In addition to sportsbook collaborations, partnerships with prediction markets have also taken media outlets by storm. Unlike online sportsbooks, these markets allow users to buy “shares” that correspond with certain results. Rather than having a stake in one outcome over another, they simply charge users a fee to invest.
Despite offering a new way to wager, prediction markets face their own set of PR challenges, which run the risk of rubbing off on their media partners. Right now, negative press comes in the form of companies’ battles to prove that they’re legitimate and legal.
Take Polymarket, for example. A recent partner of Wall Street Journal publisher Dow Jones, the company currently faces suits in New York, Nevada, and Tennessee. Similarly, CNN and CNBC partner, Kalshi, is fighting court battles in Alabama and Illinois.
The main argument against these platforms’ legality is that they function as unlicensed sports gambling operations operating in states where sports betting is illegal. Currently, Kalshi and Polymarket are defined as exchanges regulated by the federal Commodity Futures Trading Association. This distinction is what sets them apart from online sportsbooks and allows them to operate across the country without being subject to state betting restrictions.
On the regulatory landscape in Alabama, Dr. Andrew Billings, director of The University of Alabama’s Sports Communication program said:
“Alabama has become a focal point because the state has some of the toughest anti‑gambling laws in the country. The difference [between prediction market data and less sophisticated platforms like player fantasy rankings] is that Kalshi or Polymarket look and behave more like financial products than gaming platforms.”
According to the Cornell Journal of Law and Public Policy, a major argument against the legalization of sports betting and prediction markets is their tendency to create and feed gambling addictions. Upon securing a preliminary injunction in her lawsuit against Kalshi, Massachusetts Attorney General Andrea Campbell said:
“Today’s victory marks a major step toward fortifying Massachusetts’ gambling laws and mitigating the significant public health consequences that come with unregulated gambling.”
Aside from state regulators’ opinions on the rise of prediction markets, the general public is also starting to see sports betting as a negative. Data from the Pew Research Center shows that although 22% of adults admitted to placing a sports wager in 2024, 43% believe that legal sports betting in any form is bad for society.
By incorporating data from live betting markets into news broadcasts, media outlets run the risk of appearing to be complicit in fueling America’s gambling addiction crisis.
“With news networks now weaving prediction‑market data into their coverage, it can make journalism look uncomfortably close to endorsing gambling,” Billings noted.
Framing Partnerships to the Public
A few narratives dominate the conversation around media organizations and their sports betting partners according to Dr. John Fortunato, media management professor at Fordham University and author of “The Ethics of Media Framing: Examining Sports Gambling as a Legally Permitted Activity.”
“[Media companies] are not ending these partnerships,” said Fortunato. “So now it becomes, how do they justify it?”
One strategy is to emphasize the element of skill required by both online sportsbooks and prediction markets. Accurately predicting an outcome doesn’t just require knowledge of players and teams; it also helps to be able to recognize when ‘the house’ or other users are overly optimistic or pessimistic about certain occurrences. By framing platforms as tricky yet learnable, the problem shifts from outlets’ promotion of prediction markets to users’ mastery of them, or lack thereof. This approach also allows media companies to cast themselves as an asset to bettors, arguing that staying up to date through their coverage directly translates to better outcomes.
A second approach involves companies emphasizing their role in broadcasting responsible gambling messaging. “They put small disclaimers on there,” Fortunato noted, pointing to the tiny on-screen disclosures that accompany betting advertisements. The practice is largely mandatory; according to the American Gaming Association, 35 out of 38 commercial gaming jurisdictions require gambling ads to include responsible gaming messaging or a helpline number.
A final, simpler message for those eyeing prediction market partnerships with suspicion is the fact that for now, they have federal approval to operate in all 50 states. Until court verdicts come in and lawsuits are settled, media organizations are not technically promoting illegal services.
As media organizations strengthen their ties with online sportsbooks and prediction markets, the pressure on their communications professionals will only grow. Legal battles surrounding platforms like Kalshi and Polymarket are far from over, and public skepticism about sports betting’s role in society poses another challenge to consider. How each organization chooses to communicate with its audience amidst this tension will ultimately define this chapter in sports media.
