HOW BIG IS DISNEY, RIGHT NOW (and are they accountable for promoting gambling)?

[John Adams]

Posted: 8/25/25 at 10:21am

Disney is the parent company of ESPN so when you read, “ESPN” below, it’s not unreasonable to also be thinking, “Disney”. Also, all the information in my post came from an interview conducted by Will Reeve on the abcNEWS program, “What You Need To Know” (S1E30) on Disney+. FYI: abc is owned by Disney.

ESPN is developing a streaming service designed to personalize itself to the user’s favorite sports. According to the Chairman of ESPN, Jimmy Pitaro, “You’ll finally be able to get all of ESPN, all in one place. All of our content, all of our networks available direct-to-consumer, for the first time in ESPN’s history.” That one place will likely become publicly available when ESPN launches it’s new, “significantly enhanced” app. The app will feature:
     * Fantasy integration
     * Betting integration
     * Commerce integration
     * Personal integration of a Sports Center that’s tailored to the user
     * Access to 12 Networks and 47,000 live events
Additional app features being designed with personalization in mind will include:
     * Watching 4 games at once
     * Tracking Fantasy Teams in real time
     * Chances to shop or place bets while watching games

ESPN has acquired the NFL Network and the rights to WWE Live events. They are also acquiring the RedZone brand. ESPN has the potential to expand that brand to other sports and other leagues.

ESPN also finds value in Fantasy Sports. Pitaro explains, “Fantasy is a huge part of our business, NFL Fantasy, and so our fantasy product will merge with their fantasy products, and we will become the Official Fantasy Game of the NFL.”

It’s the ease of opportunity for placing bets that caught my attention.

There is no Federal ban on sports gambling, however each state is free to regulate or prohibit gambling within their own borders. Sports gambling is currently legal in 37/50 states. My initial questions are:
     * Is ESPN creating a more private, and consequently more enticing (in the sense that ‘no one is watching’), environment for gambling? Is that important to take notice of? 
     * If the use of this app turns out to be contributively problematic to our society (the potential exists), will there be any recourse to cease/reverse its consequences?

I’m interested to hear how you might respond to the questions above. Disney today, is not the same Disney I grew up with, so I have some opinions, too.

[kdogg36]

Posted: 8/25/25 at 11:50am

It's very hard to get a discussion going in this corner of BWW these days, but I'll try my best! 

Regarding the first of your two questions, there are already lots of apps where people can bet on sports, in private and with no one watching, in states where it's legal. I do think integrating it with ESPN programming will make it more convenient for many people, and therefore will probably serve to increase gambling somewhat.

Regarding the second question, I should first note that I have never been interested in gambling, but I come from a family of recreational gamblers (mother, father, sister) who clearly enjoy it as a semi-social activity and have always gambled within their moderate means. Also, I have a strong tendency to believe that, if people want to do something with their time and money that doesn't hurt anyone, then they should be able to do it. Obviously gambling addiction is a grave problem for many individuals, but I don't think that's a reason to prohibit (or even discourage) the practice for those who are able and willing to safely indulge.

In the past few years I've encountered a number of critical arguments against the rapid expansion of gambling, especially sports betting, focusing on harms to problem gamblers. I don't take these criticisms lightly, and I suspect that in the coming years we'll see pressure on the industry (through legislation or litigation) to provide more resources for those who have been negatively impacted. 

Updated On: 8/25/25 at 11:50 AM

[uncageg]

Posted: 8/25/25 at 2:40pm

I was a bit surprised while watching something on ESPN and there was a commercial promoting this. My first reaction was like "seriously"? 

And I am just kind of over Disney now. I grew up in the 60's with Disney but they just seem to now be gobbling everything up. Maybe they needed to expand their "brand" but after they acquired the "Alien" franchise I was kind of done. That is my favorite franchise and I am not going to subscribe to Disney+ to watch them.  JMO

[John Adams]

Posted: 8/26/25 at 8:02am

kdogg36 said: "It's very hard to get a discussion going in this corner of BWW these days, but I'll try my best!"

I'm so glad to see you here, kdogg! Although Disney is a big part of the topic, the name alone didn't really justify this topic as falling into the Theater discussion genre. 

"Regarding the first of your two questions, there are already lots of apps where people can bet on sports, in private and with no one watching, in states where it's legal. I do think integrating it with ESPN programming will make it more convenient for many people, and therefore will probably serve to increase gambling somewhat."

Agreed, but I think the last line you wrote is where my focus lies.

I'm flat out 'educated-guessing' on this, but I don't think any other app has, or will have the customization, integrated features, or accessibility to the enormous amount of content ESPN is projecting will be available. I believe just the moniker of "Official Fantasy Game of the NFL" will be a prestigious draw that will be more enticing to users, and steer them away from using any other app.

Bottom line is that I can see how ESPN's app could create the monopoly ESPN seeks.

"I have a strong tendency to believe that, if people want to do something with their time and money that doesn't hurt anyone, then they should be able to do it.Obviously gambling addiction is a grave problem for many individuals, but I don't think that's a reason to prohibit (or even discourage) the practice for those who are able and willing to safely indulge."

Agreed, again! But would you also agree that, "those who are able and willing to safely indulge" are not the subjects of this discussion?

In the past few years I've encountered a number of critical arguments against the rapid expansion of gambling, especially sports betting, focusing on harms to problem gamblers. I don't take these criticisms lightly, and I suspect that in the coming years we'll see pressure on the industry (through legislation or litigation) to provide more resources for those who have been negatively impacted."

Given how much of our Democratic system of government has been destroyed by Donald Trump, and how much opportunity he has for further destruction if allowed to remain in office for another 2.5 years, do you feel options like legislation and litigation are as accessible as they've been in the past? 

I attended a Town Hall meeting (2 of them, actually) led by my state Representative Lauren Underwood. In the most recent mtg I attended, Congresswoman Underwood put a question to us regarding agencies that Trump has disbanded (i.e. The Dept., of Education, et.al.) She asked, "Do you think they are coming back?" 

Because no answer was offered by anyone, I believe the question was meant to be rhetorical (and possibly meant to imply some naivety).

EDIT: as a post script, another thing that got my Spidey-senses  tingling was the absence of any mention re: what role AI will play within the app. I can't imagine that an app with such a heavy focus on personalization to each, specific user wouldn't be employed to shape the user's experience (good thing? bad thing?). 

Updated On: 8/26/25 at 08:02 AM

[John Adams]

Posted: 8/26/25 at 8:18am

uncageg said: "I grew up in the 60's with Disney but they just seem to now be gobbling everything up."

Me, too! My childhood-to-adulthood experience with Disney began with Mary Poppins and ended with Down and Out in Beverly Hills. 

During that period, the only thing The Walt Disney Company was growing was The Walt Disney Company. I can remember when their biggest growth spurt was opening DisneyWorld (that’s how “small” they were at the time… and that opening was considered “big”).

Disney had been just 'Disney' for so long that it was a little bit of a surprise/shock when they created a new company, Touchstone Pictures, to serve an adult market.

It felt (to me) that although Touchstone was still Disney, Disney didn't want to take any chances that the Touchstone brand might tarnish the wholesome, family-oriented public opinion established up until that point.

 

[Esther2]

Posted: 8/26/25 at 9:23pm

In addition to the addiction possibilities, there is a growing danger to the players.  I'm a huge baseball fan and the players - and their wives! - are getting threats on social media from gamblers who lost money by betting on them to do something.  I'm not a gambler, so I guess it's easy for me to say it shouldn't be happening the way it is, but I doubt we're going to see it end because of big money.  It's always about big money... 

Don't know if this is behind a paywall, but here's an article from the Baltimore Banner about player threats.

https://www.thebanner.com/sports/orioles-mlb/baltimore-orioles-sports-betting-threats-cade-povich-JX7WSRCH2ZDQ3D3QNEFICZXIPU/

[John Adams]

Posted: 8/27/25 at 5:05am

Esther2 said: "In addition to the addiction possibilities, there is a growing danger to the players. I'm a huge baseball fan and the players - and their wives! - are getting threats on social media from gamblers who lost money by betting on them to do something. I'm not a gambler, so I guess it's easy for me to say it shouldn't be happening the way it is, but I doubt we're going to see it end because of big money. It's always about big money... [...]"

It IS always about big money, isn't it? ...who has the most, and 'how can I take yours'?

I wasn't aware of the harassment of players and their families by bettors. Thanks for adding to the conversation!