What would you think of me, the ProPublica editor in charge of newsroom standards, if I bet on the baseball game I’m currently listening to on the radio?Maybe my wallet would be lighter in a few rounds because I’m doing what so many others are doing.
What would you think of me if I stood to make a tidy sum of money based on the outcome of a news event that ProPublica is reporting on? You’d probably think it was totally shady. Because a journalist’s job is to report the news, not to make money from it.
Don’t worry, you won’t think I’m an ethically compromised editor. According to a recent update to ProPublica’s Code of Ethics, “Employees should not bet on the outcome of news events in prediction markets, regardless of whether they are involved in reporting the event.”
ProPublica has always prohibited employees from profiting from inside information, but you may wonder why it amended its code of ethics to specifically limit prediction markets. Although we have never encountered an example of this happening with any of our staff, it is becoming increasingly difficult to deny the influence and reach of prediction markets beyond sports. In fact, there are many trades between prediction markets and news organizations, such as Calci and CNN, Fox News, the Associated Press, Polymarket and the Dow Jones.
However, there are also worrying examples in these markets. Take the case of the US soldiers involved in ousting Venezuelan President Nicolas Maduro from power. He is said to have made more than $400,000 betting on that mission. (According to the Justice Department, he has pleaded not guilty to charges of “unlawful use of confidential government information for personal gain, theft of nonpublic government information, commodity fraud, wire fraud, and illegal financial transactions.”) Or to a political candidate accused of trying to make a deal on his race. (All three received fines of about $540 to about $6,230 from Kalsi and five-year bans from the platform.) Or to journalists who detailed receiving threats from gamblers trying to change their reporting on missile strikes in Israel. (He didn’t.)
At ProPublica, we felt it was essential to establish professional boundaries in a world where individuals can have a financial stake in almost anything. Our thinking was, “If one of our employees has money riding on the results, can our readers be sure we’re covering the story without bias?”
We take our customers’ trust seriously and understand that it is something that must be earned and maintained. We have always adhered to high standards. The code of ethics specifically urges journalists to “avoid conduct that would cause a reasonable reader to question their ability to report fairly or impartially on the subject of their reporting.” We know that even the appearance that we are doing anything other than public service is a nuisance.
When we started seeing examples of people making money from the results of news events, one of our concerns was that readers might think journalists were doing the same. Even betting on news events that ProPublica likely won’t cover, such as next year’s French presidential election, is a bad idea for journalists. If someone on our staff does something like that, readers may wonder if they are betting on something close to their familiar field or their own area of expertise.
But we also wanted to be careful not to close the door to activities that don’t pose such existential reputational risks. A bunch of investigative journalists throwing a few bucks into an office sports pool isn’t going to make the public think we can’t be fair. That said, some of our loyalty to our team may lead readers to believe that we are greedy for punishment. And spending a little money on a ball game doesn’t have to be so worrying. So we were careful to state that “betting on sporting events (such as the Super Bowl or the Kentucky Derby) or attending friendlies (such as the Oscars’ in-house pool) for small amounts of money is legal and permitted if the employee is not involved in the coverage of those events.”
(And while our code of ethics allows me to bet on sporting events in these cases, I don’t because I’d rather spend my money on cheap seats and stadium novelties.)
Other retailers are also grappling with this issue. NPR recently issued guidance stating that “editorial staff are not permitted to use prediction markets or similar sites to bet on the development of news events, such as who will perform at an upcoming Tiny Desk concert, or anything else we cover or any matter controlled by NPR.” And in a memo to staff, The New York Times’ standards editor said, “Betting on the outcome of news events in prediction markets violates our principles and ethical guidelines and is not permitted.”
This goes beyond journalism and is gaining traction at the state and national level. States like Maryland and New York have introduced rules that prohibit state employees from using inside information to bet on prediction markets. Additionally, many members of the U.S. House of Representatives are calling for a ban on gambling on the platform by members of Congress and their staff.
Our Code of Ethics is not static, so we may revisit this topic and further strengthen our guidelines in the future. Or maybe work on something that isn’t even on our radar today. But we always act with our readers in mind, so you know you’re getting the truth from people who are accountable only to you. You can bet on it. In reality, you may not do that.
