Polymarket Report Claims Creator Videos Used Fake Winnings

Polymarket already sits in a legal fight over prediction markets and sports contracts. Now the platform faces a marketing problem too, after a Wall Street Journal investigation said paid creator videos showed fake bets, fake trades, and fake winnings.

Good to know

• The Wall Street Journal reviewed more than 1,100 Polymarket videos and instructional material for creators.
• Some videos reportedly used near perfect copies of the Polymarket site, with trades and winnings that were not real.
• Polymarket said it plans to audit promotional content and remains “committed to maintaining accurate, fair, and transparent markets.”

Fake Winnings Put Polymarket Marketing Under Fire

The problem for Polymarket is not only that influencers talked about the platform. The issue is how real those posts looked.

According to the Wall Street Journal, creators filmed videos that appeared to show profitable Polymarket bets. Many clips reportedly used copied versions of the Polymarket website rather than real accounts. The winnings shown in those videos were not genuine, while some trades also did not happen on the live platform.

The report said Polymarket paid online creators and gave them instructional material. It also said creators were told not to say they had been paid by Polymarket. After reporters began asking questions, some creators added “@polymarket partner” to their bios.

That disclosure detail could become important. In the U.S., paid promotion normally needs clear and easy to notice disclosure. A label hidden in a bio may not solve the issue if the video itself makes the paid relationship unclear.

The Journal also reported that a marketing contractor used a “social-media army” to lift the reach of creator videos. That made the campaign larger than a handful of one off posts.

Razeen Khan, a college student and creator who worked with Polymarket until March, defended the approach by comparing it to food advertising.

“We’re depicting what actually happens.”

Report Lands As Prediction Markets Face Legal Heat

The timing makes the report more sensitive for Polymarket. Prediction market operators are already fighting regulators over whether event contracts are derivatives or gambling products.

Sports contracts sit at the center of that fight. State regulators argue that some prediction markets look like sports betting and should follow gambling rules. Polymarket and other platforms have argued that these products belong under federal market oversight.

Recent court cases have not all gone in Polymarket favor. A Michigan federal judge denied Polymarket a preliminary injunction in a sports contract case, while Nevada also became a difficult market for the company. Those cases deal with licensing and legal authority, not creator marketing, but they shape the same trust question around prediction markets.

Polymarket also competes with Kalshi, DraftKings Predictions, FanDuel Predicts, and other event contract or prediction style products. In that wider market, user trust matters because the product depends on pricing, transparency, and belief that trades reflect real activity.

The company responded to the Journal by saying it is “committed to maintaining accurate, fair, and transparent markets” and said it plans to audit promotional content.

A content audit may answer some questions about creator instructions, paid disclosure, fake betting pages, and past videos. Regulators may ask a simpler question first: did consumers understand that the videos were ads and that the wins shown were staged?