Polymarket and Kalshi Say Influencer Partners Can’t Deny Election Results, Actually

As the United States heads into an especially contentious midterm election season, prediction markets have already run into trouble with the political commentators they pay to promote their platforms. Both Kalshi and Polymarket have asked influencers to take down “paid partnership” tags on social media posts questioning the results of the Los Angeles mayoral election, the platforms confirmed to WIRED.

As conservative former reality television star Spencer Pratt fell to third place behind incumbent Karen Bass and city counselor Nithya Raman, several popular right-wing creators published posts casting doubt on the race. In one post, a MAGA influencer known as Gunther Eagleman, who has over 1.7 million followers, suggested that Pratt’s opponents were “stealing” the election. Kalshi asked the creators to remove the posts last Friday, as Semafor first reported.

The company does not publicly disclose its contracts with paid partners, but Kalshi’s rules specifically ban affiliates from questioning the integrity or accuracy of official election results and legal rulings made in connection with 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,” spokesperson Dani Lever told WIRED.

Polymarket, meanwhile, has asked two creators to remove paid-partnership tags from posts critical of the election results, including a post from right-wing influencer Benny Johnson suggesting the reason Raman’s odds had improved in 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 was tagged as paid content from June 4 until June 8, when the partnership tag was removed.

Johnson did not respond to requests for comment. He has not posted 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.

Polymarket declined to share the language it uses in contracts with affiliates, although the company confirmed that its guidelines prohibit false and misleading statements. As the newsletter Popular Information first reported earlier today, other posts labeled as paid partnerships with Polymarket and Kalshi that promote election-denial narratives remain online, demonstrating how enforcing their guidelines has become a game of whack-a-mole for prediction-market firms. (Polymarket is pursuing additional accounts that have violated its policies, it tells WIRED.)

Last week, Politico reported that Polymarket chief marketing officer Matthew Modabber pays content creators directly using PayPal, an unorthodox arrangement. It is unclear whether Modabber paid Johnson or right-wing commentator Kangmin Lee, whose post was also removed, for these specific partnerships. Polymarket declined to comment on the form of payment.

Kalshi and Polymarket offer a wide range of politics- and elections-themed markets, and prediction-market odds are increasingly incorporated into media coverage of elections. (CNN, for example, entered into a formal partnership with Kalshi late last year.) But both platforms are under intense scrutiny from lawmakers and regulators. Many state officials believe that these startups should be regulated like gambling platforms rather than commodities exchanges, and dozens of ongoing lawsuits are attempting to force them to abide by state gambling laws. There’s also bipartisan concern over how these markets can incentivize and facilitate insider trading and market manipulation.

This latest incident raises yet another alarm: These companies have entangled themselves with influencers embracing election denialism. The odds that this is a one-off, and this army of firebrand commentators will otherwise exercise sterling judgment over what counts as appropriate paid promotional materials, look poor.