Commercials with Sydney Sweeney promoting a gambling platform and Megan Fox endorsing male enhancement have rankled fans, and even athletes. Who is in charge?

© Michael M. Santiago/Getty Images

Earlier this year, we heard that reporter Jake Pearson planned to ask our editors at ProPublica for more than $20,000 so he could spend the NBA playoffs betting like a problem gambler. 

We told him we wanted in on the action. 

For 10 weeks, our documentary team at ProPublica filmed Jake as he dove ball-cap-first into DraftKings and FanDuel, the country’s largest online sportsbooks. Jake bet early, late and often, ramping up the amounts and frequency of his wagers, chasing his losses with even bigger bets.  He wanted to flagrantly wave the red flags of a gambler descending into addiction. Would the apps serve up speed bumps as he careened into the red, or would they push him to keep betting? 

Since 2018, the year the Supreme Court opened the door for states to legalize sports betting, the number of people staking money on games has exploded. It’s now legal in 39 states and Washington, D.C. The apps don’t just offer straight action on the outcome of a “Sunday Night Football” game — you can put money on myriad sports events and outcomes, including who will score the next point in a tense contest of Czech table tennis. Every month, millions do. 

More than $600 billion has sloshed through the legal sportsbooks in wagers — and brought billions in state tax revenue — in the last eight years. But between the ever-present ads featuring celebrities from LeBron James and Charles Barkley to Kevin Hart and Kendall Jenner, cracks in the system have started to show. 

About a quarter of active sportsbook account holders surveyed by the Siena Research Institute this year said that they’d lost enough on a bet that they’d have trouble meeting their financial obligations. Other studies and public health experts warn of rising cases of bankruptcy, addiction and self-harm.

DraftKings and FanDuel say that they don’t want to profit off bettors who can’t control themselves, and they provide a range of what the industry calls “responsible gaming” tools to help users stay in check. 

Jake received pop-up notices, reminders and emails noting his time on the app and nudging him to “take a beat” after a loss. He opted into some of the tools DraftKings makes available. But he was struck by user design choices and promotions that encouraged him to keep betting, some of which he was served right after setting limits on his play. 

In a statement, DraftKings told ProPublica that it trains its more than 5,000 employees on responsible gaming and has more than 50 full-time staff dedicated to its “responsible engagement” program. A FanDuel spokesperson wrote that the company’s program is “designed to identify potential risk early and empower customers with real-time information about their play.” 

Even so, regulators and lawmakers from Colorado to Massachusetts have begun to question whether sportsbooks have sufficient protections in place. Those concerns have risen with the popularization of prediction markets, which are even less regulated than sports betting apps like DraftKings. 

We were behind the camera back in April when Jake opened his DraftKings account to place his first bet, a $100 Hail Mary wager for the New York Knicks to win the chip. We had no idea what a ride it would be.  

Watch our new documentary that follows Jake as he intentionally descends into problem gambling — and see how the apps react. 

Have you used apps like DraftKings or FanDuel to place sports bets? ProPublica is looking for at least 250 people who use these apps to share their data with us. Your transaction history will help us better understand how the apps respond to user behavior. You can also reach Jake Pearson and the reporting team at 917-512-0276 or sportsbetting@propublica.org.

The post Watch: Inside Our $22K Sports Betting Experiment appeared first on ProPublica.

Gambling regulators in New York on Friday formally proposed two rules that they say will help curb gambling addiction in the state.

The move adds the country’s largest sports betting market to a growing list of places that are seeking online gambling reforms as states that have legalized wagering on sports in recent years deal with the harmful side effects, including rising addiction diagnoses there.

While the drafts have been months in the making, their official introduction follows mounting media scrutiny, including a ProPublica investigation last month that showed weaknesses in the guardrails that companies like DraftKings have erected to address problem gamblers on their platforms. That system is called “responsible gaming.”

The commission’s chair, Brian O’Dwyer, said that the proposed rules “provide an opportunity for the industry to illustrate its commitment” to protecting its customers. 

“The industry is on notice by me and this commission that they need to solve this problem,” O’Dwyer said. “If the industry does not address it, then we will address it and they may not like the solution that we come up with.”

One of the new rules would effectively adopt guidelines that New Jersey already uses, requiring sportsbooks to follow specific thresholds to identify at-risk bettors. The company would then be mandated to check in with those users. Another rule would bar companies from using artificial intelligence to customize bonuses or wagers.

DraftKings, one of the country’s largest sports betting companies, has said it already follows the New Jersey trigger thresholds. Among them: depositing more than $10,000 in a 24-hour period or wagering more than $1 million in a 90-day period.

But as ProPublica recently reported, problem gambling can manifest in much smaller amounts. With the advice of recovering addicts, addiction specialists and professional sports bettors, a reporter deposited $21,600 into his DraftKings account in less than eight weeks and purposefully bet compulsively, exhibiting the hallmark signs of problem gambling throughout that time. The behavior didn’t qualify for a company review or interventions beyond responsible gaming notices, including in-app pop-ups.

Some advocates for gambling reforms said that’s one big reason why the proposed rules don’t go far enough.

New York and New Jersey “are clearly complacent in the status quo by endorsing and prescribing regulations that are nothing more than giving the appearance of reform and not effectuating actual change,” said Brianne Doura-Schawohl, a gambling reform advocate who lobbies for consumer and public health protections.

After the commission advanced the rules unanimously on Friday, O’Dwyer said he recognized “the limitations of this proposal” and urged the state’s nine licensed mobile sports betting companies to share data so that problem gamblers can’t elude intervention by bouncing between them. 

The introduction of the rules is a key step toward formal adoption. There will be a 60-day comment period for the public to weigh in on them. Barring major changes, the rules will then go back before the commission.

Though the plans were first published in March and received dozens of public comments, their official introduction at the gaming commission comes on the heels of reporting by The New York Times, which found that DraftKings used artificial intelligence and data scientists to target its promotions to losing bettors, and ProPublica, which found that promotions far outweighed the responsible gaming notices sent to a reporter exhibiting problematic behavior.

DraftKings made that journalist a VIP after he displayed red flags of problem gambling.

Since those articles were published last month, regulators in Maine and Michigan have also said that they are reviewing some of the issues raised in the stories.

A spokesperson for Maine’s Public Safety Department said the Gambling Control Unit is “monitoring the use of AI locally and nationally” but has no rules or laws addressing the issue and declined to provide any additional information “regarding the scope of that monitoring or specific operations.” A spokesperson for Michigan regulators hasn’t responded to requests for comment.

Massachusetts regulators, who have been looking into the use of AI by gambling companies, said they were also taking a look. The governor of Maryland has separately said he’d like to limit gambling companies’ use of AI to “identify and target users showing problem-gambling patterns.”

Asked for comment on the New York regulations, a FanDuel spokesperson said the company “welcomes the opportunity to engage with regulators and work collaboratively to establish best practices for the industry.”

A spokesperson for DraftKings referred ProPublica to its prior comments.

In statements and interviews, the company has defended its responsible gaming program and disputed any characterization that it targets addicts or those prone to addiction with inducements.

In an interview with ProPublica, Lori Kalani, DraftKings’ chief responsible gaming officer, said that, overall, “the system worked the way it was supposed to” during our gambling investigation, citing the more than 30 messages it sent our reporter. She added that “as a business, as an industry, we’re doing a good job of educating people, of raising awareness, of making tools and resources available, of monitoring accounts.”

DraftKings told the Times it “rejects any implication that its marketing practices are unfair or improperly targets customers” and said its perks were delivered to “customers who demonstrated sustained, engaged use on our platform, not toward customers based on their losses.”

The rules presented on Friday were made in response to a call by Gov. Kathy Hochul this year to address problem gambling. The Democrat, who is running for reelection, has announced a 10-year survey of residents’ gambling behavior to help “guide smart, targeted investments that protect New Yorkers and strengthen access to care.”

But the commission’s proposed rules are a relatively moderate step in that direction.

The measures would require a sports betting company to do more due diligence into a user’s “financial vulnerability” under certain conditions. Those triggers include a range of behaviors, including, for example, if a user’s time on the app jumps by 50% or more in a week compared with the immediately preceding two-week period.

In a comment letter this May, the Responsible Online Gaming Association, a trade group that includes DraftKings, FanDuel and three other major sportsbook operators, said the rules “establish a strong framework for responsible gaming” but offered some “targeted recommendations.”

Those included ensuring the triggers “avoid displacing or disrupting the mature, data-driven behavioral risk assessment systems already in use” and don’t confuse the company’s “responsible gaming role and the role of qualified clinicians.” It said any interventions should be “proportionate, operationally scalable, and effective.”

The post New York Plans Stronger Sports Betting Regulation to Curb Gambling Addiction appeared first on ProPublica.

What Happened: Bipartisan leaders from the powerful House Energy and Commerce Committee launched an inquiry on Wednesday into the Amateur Athletic Union, criticizing the sprawling youth sports organization for its handling of child sexual abuse allegations and demanding answers, citing reporting by ProPublica and The Washington Post.

What They Said: “It is unacceptable that AAU is failing to implement standard reforms to protect child athletes, and is misleading the public, parents, and athletes about preventative measures in place within AAU sports,” the letter reads.

The committee chair, Kentucky Republican Brett Guthrie, called ProPublica and The Post’s reporting “deeply disturbing” in a statement on Thursday, saying it “raises serious questions about the organization’s actions over the past decade.” 

“Our Committee is seeking information on how the AAU’s policies have potentially fallen short, and what needs to be done in order to protect young athletes,” Guthrie said.”

The members of the committee, which in 2018 investigated systemic failures surrounding sexual abuse by former USA Gymnastics doctor Larry Nassar and others, said in the letter that they were “seeing parallels” between its past investigation and “what is being uncovered within the AAU today.”

The letter is addressed to Jo Mirza, the AAU’s president, and asks detailed questions about the organization’s operations, taking the extra step of demanding a briefing from Mirza to the committee by Oct. 21. Among questions about its safety policies and coach training, the committee asks Mirza to lay out how many sexual abuse allegations the nonprofit receives each year and how many coaches it disciplines, information that has long been shrouded in secrecy. The AAU declined to provide the data to ProPublica and The Post. The AAU does not publish a list of banned coaches like many other youth sports groups do, and ProPublica and The Post found that it has used confidential arbitration clauses to keep lawsuits from child sexual abuse victims from being heard in open court.

The letter is signed by Guthrie, ranking Democrat Frank Pallone Jr. from New Jersey and representatives in charge of oversight and investigations.

Background: ProPublica and The Post found that the AAU, which has some 760,000 athletes and coaches nationwide, is failing on nearly every level to adequately protect young athletes from sexual abuse — breaking pledges it made in the wake of a 2011 sexual abuse scandal involving its CEO and young basketball players.

The investigation found that the AAU has become a haven for coaches suspected of abuse, according to a review of public disciplinary lists and interviews with current and former executives from six national sports governing bodies and other key stakeholders.

The AAU, the investigation found, does not offer child abuse prevention training, though it claims to the public that it does. And ProPublica and The Post found that it has suppressed allegations of sexual misconduct, including against another top executive in 2018.

Why It Matters: The committee is one of the key congressional groups charged with overseeing the federal youth sports safety system. It has the power to push for changes in child safety law — and to force transparency from organizations like the AAU, which has repeatedly failed to deliver on past promises of reform.

In 2018, in the wake of the allegations against Nassar, scrutiny from Congress led to the passage of a law known as the Safe Sport Act. It created the U.S. Center for SafeSport, an oversight group, to investigate allegations of sexual misconduct and gave it the power to suspend or ban coaches for life.

But SafeSport has jurisdiction only over national sports governing bodies, like USA Gymnastics and USA Volleyball, that are overseen by the Olympic and Paralympic Committee — meaning much of the law does not apply to the AAU.

The law does require “all amateur sports organizations” — not just governing bodies — to “offer and provide consistent training to all adult members … regarding prevention and reporting of child abuse.” The Energy and Commerce Committee’s letter cites that provision of the law and demands that the AAU explain how it complies.

Response: In a statement, the AAU said, “As always, we will cooperate fully and respond appropriately to any questions or requests from congressional committees or U.S. government agencies.”

Previously, the AAU told ProPublica and The Post that it is “committed to protecting its athletes through comprehensive protection policies overseen by our Compliance Department,” and said it has an “ongoing commitment to providing a safe, secure, supportive, and trusted environment where athletes can thrive.”

The post U.S. Lawmakers Launch Sexual Abuse Probe of Youth Sports Giant AAU appeared first on ProPublica.