Prediction Markets Clash With Paid Influencers Over Election Denial Content Ahead of Contentious US Midterms

As the United States enters an unusually acrimonious midterm election cycle, prediction market platforms are already facing growing friction with the political commentators they hire to promote their services.

Both major platforms Kalshi and Polymarket have confirmed to WIRED that they have ordered influencers to remove “paid partnership” tags from social media posts that cast doubt on the results of the Los Angeles mayoral election. When conservative former reality TV personality Spencer Pratt slipped to third place in the race — behind incumbent Karen Bass and city council member Nithya Raman — a slate of high-profile right-wing creators published posts questioning the legitimacy of the outcome.

One viral post came from MAGA influencer Gunther Eagleman, who boasts more than 1.7 million followers across social platforms. In the post, Eagleman claimed that Pratt’s political opponents were “stealing” the election. As outlet Semafor first reported, Kalshi formally requested that creators take these disputed posts down last Friday.

While Kalshi does not publicly release the full terms of its paid partner contracts, the company’s rules explicitly bar affiliate creators from questioning the integrity or accuracy of official election results or legal rulings tied to elections. “These are internal policies to guide our affiliates and partners, and they include standards around the promotion of and marketing of Kalshi markets on elections,” Kalshi spokesperson Dani Lever told WIRED.

For its part, Polymarket has asked two creators to remove paid-partnership labels from posts critical of the Los Angeles election results. One of the posts in question belongs to right-wing influencer Benny Johnson, who argued that the reason Nithya Raman’s odds improved on Polymarket was because “the public has so little faith in California’s elections that they just assume Democrats are going to dramatically rig it.”

Johnson’s post carried the paid content tag from June 4 until June 8, when the partnership label was removed. Johnson has not responded to requests for comment, and has not published any new Polymarket affiliate content since the takedown. “Our existing marketing guidelines explicitly prohibit affiliates from providing misleading or false information, and we will continue to monitor and ensure compliance with our paid contributors,” Olivia Chalos, Polymarket’s deputy chief legal officer, told WIRED in a statement. While Polymarket confirmed that its guidelines prohibit false and misleading claims from affiliates, the company declined to share the full text of its standard affiliate contract language.

As political newsletter Popular Information first reported earlier the same day, multiple other posts marked as paid partnerships with Kalshi and Polymarket that push election-denial narratives remain online. This demonstrates that enforcing platform content guidelines has become a constant game of whack-a-mole for prediction market firms. Polymarket tells WIRED it is currently pursuing additional accounts that have violated its policies.

Last week, Politico reported that Polymarket chief marketing officer Matthew Modabber pays content creators directly via PayPal, an unorthodox arrangement for affiliate marketing programs. It remains unclear whether Modabber paid Johnson or right-wing commentator Kangmin Lee — whose post also had its partnership tag removed — for these specific collaborations. Polymarket declined to comment on its payment practices for affiliates.

Kalshi and Polymarket offer a wide range of politics and election-themed prediction markets, and odds from these platforms are increasingly incorporated into mainstream media coverage of US elections. For example, CNN entered into a formal partnership with Kalshi late last year. But both platforms are already under intense scrutiny from lawmakers and regulators.

Many state officials argue that these startups should be regulated like gambling platforms rather than commodities exchanges, and dozens of ongoing lawsuits are seeking to force the platforms to comply with state gambling laws. There is also bipartisan concern over how prediction markets can incentivize and facilitate insider trading and market manipulation.

This latest incident raises a new, separate red flag: these companies have now entangled themselves financially with influencers who openly embrace election denialism. The odds that this is an isolated incident, and that this cohort of outspoken commentators will consistently exercise sound judgment when it comes to appropriate paid promotional content, look exceedingly low.