The Problem with Binding News and Prediction Markets

Polymarket and Kalshi are quickly making deals with news publishers, with potential implications for the regulation of prediction markets. It’s unclear how journalism wins.

Prediction markets—platforms where users can place wagers on the outcomes of future events —are suddenly all over the news. Every day we’re seeing headlines—allegations of insider trading, states accusing prediction markets of violating gambling laws, warnings about the “depravity economy.” We’re also seeing prediction markets’ efforts at becoming part of the news ecosystem. Since November of 2025, companies such as Polymarket and Kalshi have instigated a wave of partnership deals with publishers including CNN, CNBC, Dow Jones, and Yahoo Finance—as well as Substack—enabling publishers to integrate real-time betting data into their TV and digital coverage. (Kalshi is also reportedly in advanced talks with Fox Corp.) The markets are even courting independent journalists. “Of all the tech platforms and innovations to come round in the past two decades, prediction markets have been among the first to actively, from the get go, seek partnerships with news organizations,” Nik Usher, an associate professor of communication at the University of San Diego, pointed out in a Substack post.

Are prediction markets supplemental or substitutional to news? Are they benefiting the information ecosystem at all? Polymarket and Kalshi frame their media partnerships as a boon for journalism. Polymarket has declared that “journalism is better when it’s backed by live markets.” Tarek Mansour, Kalshi CEO and cofounder, argued that partnering with his company can enable news outlets to help audiences better understand what may happen in the future. But the terms of their media deals are opaque. Beyond access to data, the value exchange—who is paying whom, how much, and for what, exactly—remains largely undisclosed. Polymarket and Kalshi did not respond to CJR’s request for comment for this piece.