On the morning of this week’s Sunday Project, Marc Lefkowitz sat down to breakfast with nine men in gambling treatment. Marc has worked in the gambling field for more than 30 years and has been in his own recovery for over 43. He asked each of them the same question: Have you thought about suicide?
All nine said yes.
“That’s what we have now,” Marc told the panel. “And nobody’s putting out that word.”
That conversation framed the discussion that followed, about a new investigation from ProPublica. It found that one of America’s largest sportsbooks rewarded a customer who was openly betting like a problem gambler, rather than stepping in to protect him.
The investigation
Last month, ProPublica reporter Jake Pearson published the results of a 10-week experiment on DraftKings (1). He opened an account in his own name, funded by ProPublica, and deliberately bet in a pattern that an expert panel described as problem gambling: chasing losses, depositing frequently, extending sessions, and steadily increasing his stakes.
The findings were stark:
- He deposited $21,600 in under eight weeks and lost $10,702 in total.
- After losing nearly $1,800 in a single night, he received a “Welcome to the DraftKings VIP Showcase” email the following day.
- He was formally accepted as a VIP after three weeks and $5,800 in deposits, and was assigned a personal VIP representative.
- He then received a steady stream of promotions, including profit boosts on live microbets and offers to double his winnings. Shortly after he took a three-day cool-off, his representative gave him an extra $1,250 in bonus credit on a $5,000 deposit.
- His first in-app responsible gaming message came at $2,500 in deposits. It was required by New York law, not triggered by his behavior.
- Despite all of this, his account was never flagged for manual problem gambling review.
DraftKings’ chief responsible gaming officer, Lori Kalani, told ProPublica that “the system worked the way it was supposed to,” and cautioned against “drawing broad conclusions” from a single account (1). The company also said responsible gaming is “embedded across our business.”
 Marc’s response on the panel was blunt: “When someone displays signs of gambling addiction, why are we rewarding them for gambling more? If that’s responsible gambling, seriously, rethink what responsible means.”
Where the money goes
The investigation raises a wider question. How much does the industry spend on acquiring and keeping bettors, compared with what is spent on protecting them?
The figures are not close.
Amount DraftKings sales and marketing expense, 2025 $1.38 billion (2) Total public funding for problem gambling services across the entire US, fiscal 2023 $134 million (3) In other words, one sportsbook’s annual marketing budget is roughly ten times what every US state combined allocated to problem gambling prevention, treatment and recovery services. The national figure works out to an average of about 54 cents per resident, and some states spend almost nothing.
The imbalance shows up inside the company too. ProPublica reported that DraftKings has more than 5,000 employees, and a responsible gaming team of 51 people (1). The same industry seeded a political action committee with $41 million to influence elections this year.
Protection tools exist, but they depend on the customer to switch them on. According to a company official cited by ProPublica, just over 8% of active DraftKings users in Massachusetts were using responsible gaming tools as of April (4).
Why the heaviest losers matter most
The VIP model makes more sense once you see where sportsbook revenue comes from. ProPublica cites a 2024 Connecticut study that found 1.8% of problem gamblers accounted for 51% of sports betting revenue (1).
When half of revenue depends on a small group of people who are gambling in a harmful way, those customers are not a side effect of the business. They are central to it. Bonuses, personal representatives and tailored offers are aimed at keeping them betting, and the experience of a VIP looks a lot like the warning signs a clinician would look for.
The harm is not confined to a small group, either. A Siena Research Institute survey cited by ProPublica found that around a quarter of active sportsbook account holders had lost enough on a bet to have trouble meeting their financial obligations (1).
The real-world cost
The nine men at Marc’s breakfast are not a research sample. But what they told him is consistent with the evidence.
A Swedish national register study of more than 2,000 people diagnosed with gambling disorder found that their suicide mortality was about 15 times higher than that of the general population (5). Depression was a key predictor of suicide death.
Clinicians on the panel see the toll every week. Dan Field, LCSW, Clinical Director of Westside Gambling Treatment, said some of his clients in their mid-twenties have lost upwards of $100,000 in a single year. When they arrive for treatment, he said, “they are defeated. They’re despairing… They’re feeling absolute financial and mental pain.”
Marc drew the contrast with the advertising that surrounds sports betting. “Nine out of nine, suicidal ideation,” he said, “and they don’t have to say that on an ad. To me, that is mind-blowing.”
Following people into recovery
Marc raised two further concerns that point the same way.
The first is what happens after someone decides to stop. A person might go to treatment, see a therapist, attend Gamblers Anonymous and delete the apps, yet still be served gambling advertising on their phone, their computer and during every game they watch. “We tell people with gambling disorders to avoid triggers,” Marc said. “Yet promotions follow them right into their own homes.” His proposal was simple: when someone says they don’t want gambling ads, stop showing them gambling ads.
The second is the rise of prediction markets, which let users trade “event contracts” on sports results and, increasingly, on entertainment such as reality TV and awards shows. Some of these contracts are open to 18-year-olds, even though most states set the legal age for sports betting at 21. Marc noted that the earlier gambling starts, the greater the risk of later problems. “Changing the name doesn’t change the behavior,” he said, “and changing the platform doesn’t eliminate the risks.”
Who is protecting the consumer?
That was the question Marc kept returning to, and the ProPublica investigation offers an uncomfortable answer. In New York, for example, operators must have a “problem-gaming plan,” but the law leaves the details to the companies and the plans are not made public. DraftKings declined to share its plan with ProPublica (4).
As things stand, the protection of vulnerable bettors relies mainly on the same companies that profit most from them. Meaningful change would likely include:
- Proactive intervention, so that clear warning signs such as loss chasing and escalating deposits trigger human review, rather than VIP offers.
- Limits by default, rather than opt-in tools used by fewer than one in ten customers.
- Real advertising opt-outs that apply across channels for anyone who asks to stop.
- Treatment funding in line with the scale of the market. The National Association of Administrators for Disordered Gambling Services recommends states set aside 2% of gross gaming revenue for problem gambling services (3). Current funding falls well short of that.
Closing
Marc has spent more than three decades working with people whose lives have been upended by gambling. His conclusion from this week’s news: “The people who will pay the highest price won’t be the companies collecting the money. They will be individuals, families, and especially young people.”
The nine men at breakfast are a reminder of what lies behind the revenue figures. Until spending on protection begins to match spending on acquisition, the burden of harm will continue to fall on them, and on the families and services trying to help.
Stop Betting Sports runs the Sunday Project every week, and parents can join Chat with Dan every Tuesday at 5pm to ask questions and hear from other families. Find out more at stopbettingsports.com.
If someone you love is in crisis or talking about self-harm, call or text 988 (Suicide & Crisis Lifeline) in the US.
Sources
- Pearson, J. (2026, September 26). “I Deliberately Bet Like a Problem Gambler. DraftKings Made Me a VIP.” ProPublica. https://www.propublica.org/
article/draftkings-sports- gambling-problem-vip-fanduel - DraftKings Inc. (2026, February 12). Fourth quarter and fiscal year 2025 results, consolidated statements of operations (Form 8-K, Exhibit 99.1). US Securities and Exchange Commission. https://www.sec.gov/Archives/
edgar/data/1883685/ 000188368526000011/q425- prx8kexx991.htm - National Association of Administrators for Disordered Gambling Services (2024). 2023 Budget Update of Publicly Funded Problem Gambling Services in the United States, as reported by Bonus.com. https://www.bonus.com/news/
naadgs-report-shows-us- problem-gambling-spend-higher- 2023/ - Pearson, J. (2026, October 6). “What Our Reporter Learned From Gambling on DraftKings for 10 Weeks.” ProPublica. https://www.propublica.org/
article/sports-gambling- draftkings-takeaways - Karlsson, A., & Håkansson, A. (2018). Gambling disorder, increased mortality, suicidality, and associated comorbidity: A longitudinal nationwide register study. Journal of Behavioral Addictions, 7(4), 1091–1099. https://doi.org/10.1556/2006.
7.2018.112
Support is available
Stop Betting Sports hosts free weekly support spaces for people affected by gambling – including parents and loved ones.