(Photo: Marcelo Moreira / Pexels)
Brett Colon, Sports Committee — ESPN recently launched one of the biggest enterprises in the company’s history: ESPN Bet. The $2 billion sportsbook that was initially acquired from Penn Gaming, has already been approved in seventeen states as it looks to claim a large portion of the sports betting market. As the industry continues to expand, ESPN is just another example of an entertainment giant vying for a seat at the table.
A physical platform for customers to scan odds and wager bets is a necessity in this industry, but what separates big players from smaller sportsbooks is marketing power and customer loyalty. Companies like FanDuel and DraftKings are consistently market leaders, spending billions of dollars on advertising over the last decade. Another key differential is a prominent presence in the media landscape. Many are familiar with Caesars Sportsbook commercials, which feature famous comedian J.B. Smoove portraying the eponymous emperor, but what about ‘real’ sports journalists reporting on behalf of sportsbooks?
ESPN is the pinnacle of the sports media landscape, and as it enters the sports betting industry, it will not be a surprise to see some of its coverage shift to appease consumers on their betting platform. Other companies have already begun; reporter hirings have become commonplace among major sportsbooks, and just recently, Caesar’s tried hiring Senior NFL insider Adam Schefter to report on their behalf.
Prominent sports journalists exert significant influence on content and betting markets. If major sportsbooks continue to direct the media we consume, where do they cross the line? As more and more leading reporters sign deals with significant sportsbooks, the sports media industry will continue to head in this dangerous direction, and the trust between news and consumers will only become smaller.
When Brandon Miller was selected with the second overall pick in last year’s NBA draft, my reaction was unsurprising. For starters, Miller was the Southeastern Conference’s leading scorer last season, averaging 18.8 points per game, and was a crucial component in Alabama’s dominant run that led them to be a one-seed in the NCAA tournament, the first to do so in school history. While the first couple of the draft’s picks did not tailor far away from most people’s predictions, what stood out from night one was the controversy that ensued.
On the morning of the draft, prominent sports reporter Shams Charania, who commonly goes by the name “Shams,” tweeted on X that inside sources were claiming the Charlotte Hornets (the team with the second overall pick) were “torn over” their draft selection and that top prospect Scoot Henderson was gaining “serious momentum” to be their selection. Before this tweet, there was almost no major talk that Henderson was in consideration for the second pick, and the idea that Miller would be a Charlotte Hornet was almost certain.
On the betting side, this tweet caused an immense shift in odds, with Henderson immediately going from +400 to -900, the heavy favorite. This sent sports bettors into a frenzy, with many people throwing down large sums of money on Henderson to be picked, with one even betting $500 solely after seeing Sham’s tweet. Shortly after, Miller was selected second overall and gambling companies earned a significant profit from the ‘new information’ Charania had provided.
While betting on the NBA draft tends to be volatile, it is essential to note that although sports journalism outlet The Athletic employs Shams, he also has a partnership with sportsbook FanDuel and appears on their TV network weekly. Shams works in part with a company that wants to increase its betting volume, so it follows that he is incentivized to release information that does so. While a FanDuel spokesperson later released a statement saying that “FanDuel is not privy to any news that Shams breaks on his platforms,” it is undeniable that even if FanDuel did not directly collude with him, they don’t have to explicitly tell him to ‘move the lines’ for it to be done. Shams gets paid by Fanduel, so he will be incentivized to report on behalf of their incentives as well. Perhaps FanDuel was not receiving a lot of betting volume on the draft, and by Shams ‘spicing things up’ with a quick tweet and new information, FanDuel got to walk away with their pockets full while their customers lost out.
There are also other instances of such sketchy endeavors, with multiple known instances of reporters affecting betting markets during low betting periods. Knowing what information to trust will become extremely difficult as significant sportsbooks expand into the sports media space.
The solution to this may seem simple: if a reporter continuously gets caught up in such scandals, people will eventually stop trusting them, but that is not where the problem lies. The real issue is how difficult it can be to catch these culprits, and as the betting industry expands its presence in the media landscape, it will only get more complex. If a reporter sends out a “shaky” tweet once a year, any significant shift in betting lines could be interpreted as a coincidence or part of their job. This ambiguity will allow reporters to drop in whenever it is easiest to shake up the markets and get out before anyone can do anything about it.
So what is the solution? One way to face this issue is to establish boundaries between sports media and the sportsbook giants. If the merging of sports reporting and betting is too disastrous, these companies must find other ways to attract customers and build a base. A more realistic approach will be establishing strict guidelines for these sportsbooks, looking over whom they can hire and what they can report on. While none seem perfect, some action must be taken to some extent with the industry’s direction. With the number of people betting rising exponentially each year, increasing numbers of people will trust reporters whose job is to deliver accurate news, and the costs of fractures in this process could prove detrimental.