Traditional news media tends to focus on what has happened, social media on what is happening, and prediction markets, the newest entrants to the news ecosystem, on what might happen next. The partnership between one of those prediction markets, Kalshi, and established news providers CNN and CNBC may have come as a surprise to many. But it reflects a logic with profound implications: market odds are starting to function as news themselves.
Platforms like Polymarket, Kalshi, and Robinhood are quickly turning elections, sports, earnings calls, and cultural flashpoints into tradable markets, where anyone can back their view with money. In the lead-up to the New York City mayoral elections in early November, hundreds of millions of dollars in bets produced a live, crowd-weighted view of the outcome of the race, functioning as a forward-looking headline. Mamdani won, an outcome the markets and opinion polls had been pointing to well in advance.
People have long wagered on headline outcomes, especially elections. What's new is that prediction markets make wagering easy, democratising news betting much like Robinhood democratised stock trading. They turn questions about real-world events into standardised contracts that people can buy and sell before they resolve, with odds that update continuously. And with volumes continuing to grow, it becomes easier to trade in and out of positions, lowering barriers to participation. The wide range of topics they cover also means almost anyone can find a market they have a view on. Prediction markets sit at the intersection of trading, gambling, entertainment, and news. Users are not just consuming content. They are staking money on what they think will happen. This creates a level of interactivity and engagement far beyond what traditional media or social media can offer.
Beyond engagement, these markets also produce a constant stream of prices and implied probabilities about real-world events, generated by thousands of individual bets. With much of that data published on-chain, it is widely available and easy to build on, making it possible to create new products and interfaces. Imagine "Bloomberg Terminal" style screens that aggregate scattered odds and prices into a single, coherent picture of event contracts. As more tooling gets built, it is not unreasonable to expect a cottage industry of professional forecasters to emerge, alongside dedicated funds with proprietary systems designed to profit from forecasting and trading these markets. As Kalshi's CEO recently predicted, these markets may eventually rival the stock market itself.
This emerging prediction economy feeds into a broader marketplace of more conventional information and comment. Breaking stories from news sources and social media prompt prediction platforms to launch new markets. Odds from those markets then inform social chatter and find their way into traditional media coverage, which in turn brings more people to those platforms and drives up trading volume. And so, in theory, a powerful feedback loop is created.
This is precisely why these new prediction markets are becoming big business. Robinhood's new prediction hub is on course to surpass $100 million in revenue this year, with CEO Vlad Tenev calling it the fastest-growing product in the company's history. Last month, Robinhood announced a joint venture with options trader Susquehanna to operate an exchange and clearing house for "the future," licensed by the US regulator, the CFTC. This could bring massive retail distribution and institutional liquidity to the space. Meanwhile, Polymarket is reportedly seeking to raise capital at a valuation of $15 billion, and Kalshi has just raised $300 million at an $11 billion valuation, up from $5 billion just the month prior. For context, the New York Times' market cap currently sits around $10 billion. If you view prediction markets as news ecosystem players, they already rival and could rapidly overtake established incumbents.
Are they accurate in predicting the future? After all, no great genius was required to predict Mamdani would win the New York City mayoral election. He had been ahead in the polls by miles long before betting on that race attracted serious attention and volume. However, a July 2025 report from academics at Vanderbilt University suggested that prediction markets were more accurate than conventional polling in predicting the outcome of the 2024 US presidential election, particularly in swing states. The explanation rests on the wisdom of crowds hypothesis. If humans are rational, act in their own best interests, and have abundant public information, they should collectively generate accurate probabilities.
However, for the crowds to be wise, their betting must be based on reliable, verified, and evidence-based information. That can only come from conventional newsgathering. Its role is critical to these markets' long-term credibility and informational value. Without a steady supply of verified facts, odds drift toward rumour, coordinated narratives, and noise. It is the edifice they must be built on if they are to be accurate in their predictions. If conventional newsgathering dies, then so will these markets, as all that will be left will be guesswork.
And there is another danger. Speculation is susceptible to coordination risk. As these markets scale and media outlets cite their odds, motivated actors could try to push prices in a particular direction, distorting the signal and potentially influencing real-world behaviour. If that happens in an election, there would be serious consequences. How to prevent it is a critical question that these companies and their regulators will need to answer.
In many ways, prediction markets perfectly fit the current Zeitgeist. A generation raised on Robinhood, r/wallstreetbets, and high-velocity social platforms like TikTok might find traditional media boring. Betting on the news is an adrenaline rush. Prediction market advocates argue these bets are anchored in real-world events and track fundamental facts, not the kind of vibe-driven trading that powered the GameStop frenzy of 2021.
To be clear, prediction markets are not a replacement for journalism. They are built on top of it, and increasingly intertwined with it. They depend on a steady stream of verified facts to create new markets and give participants enough information to act. For now, their influence on the broader conversation is still emerging, but the trajectory is clear. The result is a news ecosystem where verified facts serve as the input and settlement layer for a growing economy of speculation.