Major studios and production companies are quietly updating their internal guidelines to discourage employees from participating in prediction market betting. The new policies warn staff against wagering on industry news, including studio earnings, casting announcements, and film release dates. These measures represent an expansion of traditional insider trading rules, adapted to the modern landscape of speculative betting platforms.
The prohibitions extend beyond direct employee action. Staff are also forbidden from sharing confidential information with friends and family members who might place bets based on that knowledge. At least one company has implemented an anonymous hotline to allow employees to report suspected violations by their colleagues, signaling a serious effort to enforce the new standards.
Joshua Mitts, a law professor at Columbia University who specializes in the legal aspects of prediction markets, noted that the rise of these platforms has forced many employers to rethink their ethical guidelines regarding insider information. He explained that the primary challenge is now compliance and education, ensuring employees understand what is permissible even if they are not facing criminal prosecution.
The parent company of The Hollywood Reporter, PMC, has also updated its employee handbook to reflect these changes. The new rules explicitly ban betting on award nominations, casting decisions, production timelines, and release dates. This move aligns the company with the broader industry trend of curbing speculative activity among insiders.
Recent incidents have highlighted the growing issue of improper betting in the entertainment sector. In February, the platform Kalshi revealed that a video editor at MrBeast’s company had earned $5,000 by using confidential content information to place bets. The employee was subsequently fired and assessed a $20,000 penalty. In April, a separate report identified a worker on a CBS competition show who had also profited from prediction markets.
Despite these policies, industry sources indicate that opportunities for insider betting remain widespread. Markets exist for specific outcomes on popular talk shows and variety programs, many of which are pre-taped or involve public audiences. This creates a complex environment where distinguishing between informed insiders and lucky public bettors can be difficult.
In a notable incident this week, the betting site BetOnline temporarily suspended its market for the next James Bond actor. The decision came after significant betting activity surged in favor of Callum Turner, displacing the previous favorite. A representative suggested that the sudden shift in odds indicated a potential leak of information following recent auditions.
A study by Mitts and Moran Ofir from the University of Haifa estimated that $143 million in anomalous profit was generated on Polymarket over a two-year period. The researchers noted that this figure has likely increased significantly as the variety of available betting categories has expanded. Mitts argued that betting on entertainment news offers little social utility compared to other forms of market hedging.
Regulatory bodies are also weighing in on the matter. The Commodity Futures Trading Commission recently invited public comment on which entertainment events should be eligible for trading. While the CFTC indicated that award shows should be allowed because they rely on evaluative judgment, it remained uncertain about game shows and reality competitions. The agency questioned whether these events should be classified as gaming given their varying standards of fairness.
Tracing these bets can be particularly challenging for employers, especially on blockchain-based platforms where identities can be obscured through multiple layers of intermediation. Mitts noted that if regulators decide to prioritize enforcement, the entertainment industry is a likely candidate for scrutiny due to the high potential for insider trading and the relatively low social benefit of such markets.
