Authorities approved the license for Predict Street Ltd on March 26, formally adding the company to the territory’s register of betting intermediaries. The move was announced in parliament by Justice, Trade and Industry Minister Nigel Feetham, who framed it as part of a broader strategy to modernize Gibraltar’s regulatory framework and reduce reliance on traditional gaming revenues.

While Gibraltar is in the process of overhauling its gambling laws, officials processed the application under existing legislation. A more comprehensive reform bill, designed to strengthen oversight and bring the jurisdiction in line with evolving global standards, has yet to come into force.

Fast-tracked approval draws attention

The pace of the approval caught lawmakers’ attention, with Feetham highlighting what he described as an unusually quick regulatory turnaround.

We expect this to be a substantial area of growth for Gibraltar,” he said during the parliamentary session, calling the approval a case of “record timing” for a license of this kind.

The speed signals a sense of urgency within government. Gibraltar is moving aggressively to position itself at the forefront of emerging digital sectors, particularly as uncertainty clouds its traditional revenue streams.

Mounting pressure on a gambling-dependent economy

For years, Gibraltar has leaned heavily on online gambling, which accounts for roughly one-third of government revenue and supports a significant share of local employment.

But that model is facing strain. Rising gambling duties in the United Kingdom, a key market for Gibraltar-based operators, have driven up costs and squeezed margins. The changes have forced companies to reassess their operations and raised broader concerns about the territory’s long-term economic stability.

In response, policymakers have begun actively seeking new growth areas. Feetham has taken a more visible, hands-on role in promoting Gibraltar as a competitive regulatory hub, particularly for emerging technologies.

“We are working relentlessly to protect Gibraltar’s economic interests,” he said in a separate statement, underscoring the government’s proactive stance.

A strategic push into prediction markets

Prediction markets allow users to trade on the outcomes of real-world events, blurring the line between financial instruments and traditional betting products. That hybrid nature has made them difficult to classify, leaving regulators worldwide divided. By licensing Predict Street, Gibraltar is positioning itself among the first European jurisdictions to formally embrace the sector.

Elsewhere, the approach has been far more cautious. Regulators in countries such as Germany, France, and the Netherlands have restricted or blocked prediction market platforms, reflecting ongoing uncertainty about how to regulate them.

Global regulatory tensions intensify

The debate over prediction markets is also heating up globally.

In the United States, the Commodity Futures Trading Commission has recently sued three states (Arizona, Connecticut, and Illinois), marking a new chapter in the ongoing debate over prediction markets and who should regulate them.

At the same time, some states are exploring clearer regulatory frameworks. Iowa, for example, has advanced legislation aimed at defining and potentially permitting certain types of prediction market activity. Meanwhile, tribal gaming groups have voiced concerns about federal encroachment into areas traditionally governed by state and tribal authorities.

Predict Street eyes a global opportunity

Predict Street operates as a crypto-based platform backed by Abu Dhabi blockchain firm ADI Chain. The company is targeting a public launch on April 9 and has already begun onboarding early users.

It is also leaning heavily into sports marketing, branding itself as the “Official Prediction Market Partner” of the FIFA World Cup 2026 in an effort to capture global attention ahead of the tournament.

Still, significant hurdles remain. Access to major markets such as the UK could prove challenging if regulators ultimately classify prediction markets as gambling products, subjecting them to stricter rules and higher compliance costs.

A calculated risk for a changing industry

For Gibraltar, the decision to license Predict Street reflects a calculated bet on the future of digital finance and gaming.

The move underscores a broader shift. Rather than waiting for global regulatory consensus, the territory is choosing to act early and shape its own position in a fast-evolving market. Whether that strategy pays off will depend largely on how other regulators respond and whether prediction markets can secure a stable footing within the global regulatory landscape.

Featured image: Berthold Werner, CC BY-SA 3.0 https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0, via Wikimedia Commons

The post Gibraltar Licenses First Prediction Markets Operator Amid Gambling Shift appeared first on Our Story Insight.

For years, prediction markets, or the like, have tested the edges of US financial regulation. That said, the CFTC’s latest announcement does not exactly settle that discussion. Instead, it sketches out how exchanges should manage sports-related contracts if they are ultimately allowed to exist.

The advisory represents a pragmatic shift. By referring to Designated Contract Market (DCM) Core Principles, the CFTC is saying ‘if this is allowed, it must be done like other products in our markets.’ In practical terms, this signals that the Commission is open to these listings if the courts determine that they are legal and the CFTC has authority over them.

Peter Sanchez Guarda, former CFTC Special Counsel

To some observers, the tone matters.

Peter Sanchez Guarda, who spent more than two decades at the CFTC and previously served as Special Counsel, said the agency’s message appears more pragmatic than prohibitive. Rather than rejecting the concept outright, regulators seem to be laying the groundwork for oversight if courts decide the products are legal.

“The advisory represents a pragmatic shift,” Sanchez Guarda told ReadWrite. “By referring to Designated Contract Market (DCM) Core Principles, the CFTC is saying ‘if this is allowed, it must be done like other products in our markets.’”

Today, Sanchez Guarda runs Peter Sanchez Guarda Consulting and Turnkey Family Office. From his perspective, the communiqué reads less like a warning and more like early regulatory preparation.

“In practical terms, this signals that the Commission is open to these listings if the courts determine that they are legal and the CFTC has authority over them,” he said.

The document itself focuses on practical oversight issues. Exchanges that list sports event contracts, the agency said, should think carefully about surveillance, contract design, and ways to protect market integrity. This comes as prediction markets gain attention across the US, particularly on platforms with contracts tied to real-world outcomes such as elections, economic indicators, and sports competitions.

Legal ambiguity around gaming definitions for prediction markets

One of the biggest questions hanging over sports prediction markets comes down to a single word ie. gaming.

Current CFTC rules generally bans contracts tied to gaming or activities deemed contrary to the public interest. But the law offers surprisingly little guidance about what gaming actually means.

For the past year, a lot of these products exploded in popularity – now is the time to put out guidance and make sure that we’re not regulating by enforcement like the Biden administration did. We’re setting standards and making clear what the @CFTC’s statue says.… pic.twitter.com/XjIXGlbwcf

— Mike Selig (@ChairmanSelig) March 12, 2026

Sanchez Guarda said the resulting legal debate has become highly technical.

“This is one of those ‘how many angels fit on the head of a pin’ debates,” he said.

The rule at the center of the issue, Rule 40.11, bars certain contracts linked to gaming. Yet neither the rule nor the wider Commodity Exchange Act lays out a clear definition.

The gap has become a focal point in disputes between regulators and companies operating prediction market platforms.

“The only federal statute that defines ‘gaming’ is the Indian Gaming Regulatory Act,” Sanchez Guarda said. “But IGRA only applies on Indian land, not the rest of the US.”

He added that critics of sports event contracts tend to raise another argument, which is that these markets may not meet the Commodity Exchange Act’s definition of a commodity at all.

This particular concern surfaced when the CFTC previously approved one of the earliest event contracts. In that case, the decision passed by a narrow margin, with two commissioners issuing dissenting opinions questioning whether the contracts truly fit within the agency’s authority.

CFTC advisory attempts to address integrity concerns and manipulation risks

Beyond legal definitions, regulators also worry about the potential for manipulation.

The advisory specifically flags risks tied to contracts that hinge on narrow or highly specific outcomes inside a game. These types of bets may be far more challenging for exchanges to monitor than contracts based on broader results.

Sanchez Guarda said the difference is significant.

[There] is nothing in the legislative history of the CEA to suggest that it was intended to take authority for sports betting away from the 50 states, and give it to a small agency that most people have never heard of.Peter Sanchez Guarda, former CFTC Special Counsel

“Monitoring ‘single-incident’ outcomes, like a specific player’s performance, is significantly more difficult than monitoring a final game score,” he said.

When a contract focuses on a small moment inside a game, the opportunity for manipulation can increase. A player might influence the outcome of a narrowly defined bet without affecting the final score or the overall result of the match.

From a regulator’s standpoint, these scenarios create serious monitoring challenges.

“The CFTC doesn’t have the staff to police that,” he said, especially in light of cuts to services. “And if prediction markets let you bet on anything, how will the exchanges have enough staff to monitor everything that happens in the world and detect if someone knew something and bet on it?”

The concerns are one reason the guidance reiterates surveillance responsibilities for exchanges that list event-based contracts. The agency appears to be indicating that monitoring systems and integrity controls would need to match the complexity of the markets themselves.

Federal oversight versus state betting systems

Another layer of tension involves the relationship between federal financial regulators and state gambling authorities.

Sports betting is already legal in many states, where it operates under detailed licensing systems and often generates significant tax revenue. If federally regulated exchanges begin offering sports event contracts nationwide, that could overlap with, or potentially compete with, those state markets. And that fight has already begun in multiple states such as Nevada, Ohio, and Iowa.

Sanchez Guarda said that possibility raises a wider question about congressional intent.

“There is nothing in the legislative history of the Commodity Exchange Act to suggest that it was intended to take authority for sports betting away from the 50 states and give it to a small agency that most people have never heard of,” Sanchez Guarda said.

In discussions about federal authority, he pointed to a principle frequently cited by the US Supreme Court.

“Congress doesn’t hide elephants in mouseholes,” he said.

The phrase reflects the idea that Congress typically spells out major regulatory changes directly, rather than embedding them indirectly in older statutes.

For critics of sports prediction markets, this suggests the CFTC may not have been meant to oversee what looks, to many people, like a new form of sports betting.

Prediction markets are one of the most exciting innovations in financial markets. Yet for too long, the @CFTC has failed to provide guidance for these markets being used by millions of Americans. This ends today.

Read what steps the agency is taking here…

— Mike Selig (@ChairmanSelig) March 12, 2026

Still, the legal landscape around agency authority has changed exponentially in recent years.

Courts historically have often deferred to federal agencies when interpreting ambiguous statutes. This was known as the Chevron doctrine. But in 2024, the Supreme Court overturned that precedent in the case Loper Bright Enterprises v. Raimondo.

The ruling means judges are now more likely to interpret statutory language independently rather than relying heavily on an agency’s reading of the law.

“The agency’s opinions about what the statute says don’t carry any special weight anymore,” Sanchez Guarda said.

The change could prove decisive as prediction markets expand. If disputes over sports event contracts reach federal courts, judges, rather than regulators, may ultimately decide whether these products belong under derivatives regulation or gambling law.

For now, regulators are sketching the rules of a market that may or may not survive. Whether sports prediction contracts become a new corner of Wall Street, or are shut down as gambling, is likely to be decided in court.

Featured image: Canva

The post CFTC advisory sports prediction markets a ‘pragmatic shift’ appeared first on Our Story Insight.

The decision was reached following “extensive consultation” with the UK government regarding its review of gambling legislation, which was prevalent in the recent budget announcement from the incumbent Labour government. 

The new arrangement will apply from the start of the 2026/27 Premier League season, and while the change will be apparent, critics would say it’s nothing more than a case of moving the goalposts. 

Although the logos of various mainstream (and not so well-known) gambling brands will be removed from the front of shirts, these companies will still be represented on shirt sleeves, on the back of the shirts, on training kits, on advertising boards around the pitch, and elsewhere within the stadium. 

It appears to be a clever, calculated step, but one that comes with risk.

Premier League clubs made more than £1bn from their shirts alone last season, taking into account the value of their kit supplier deals, front-of-shirt sponsors and income from sleeve sponsors. Kit manufacturers have committed to providing nearly £492m across twenty agreements. pic.twitter.com/SQ4xVTrx21

— Łukasz Bączek (@Lu_Class_) August 22, 2025

The Premier League clubs have effectively self-policed, cognizant of pressures and developments at Westminster, with the UK government announcing a Gambling Act review white paper. 

They have bought time to work around the new arrangements in tandem with gambling partners, but there will be a significant void to fill on the front of shirts. 

The Premier League previously intimated that “a self-regulatory approach would provide a practical and flexible alternative to legislation or outright prohibition”.

In addition to the move instigated by the elite body in English soccer, a code of conduct was also agreed upon between the Premier League, Football Association (national governing body), English Football League (tiers 2-4), and Women’s Super League.

This is more of a safeguarding position, based on four general principles around gambling sponsorships. 

There is no impending gambling sponsorship ban on the front of shirts for the lower leagues in England, and that situation is further compounded as SkyBet is the title sponsor of the EFL Championship, League One, and League Two.

Reduction in value of shirt sponsorships and overall revenues

In the current 2025/26 Premier League season, 11 of 20 clubs have a gambling brand as their front-of-shirt sponsor and key partner. 

Those teams are Aston Villa, Bournemouth, Brentford, Crystal Palace, Everton, Fulham, Leicester, Nottingham Forest, Southampton, West Ham, and Wolves. 

That is a lot of revenue to replace, with the collective value of these sponsorship deals exceeding £140 million ($189 million) per season, according to Football Media CEO, Dean Akijobe. 

As reported by Hansard, the official report of all Parliamentary debates, West Ham United vice-Chairperson Karren Brady told a House of Lords debate last November that “the typical difference between gambling and non-gambling shirt sponsorships is around 40%.” 

She added, “For some Premier League clubs, this decision (to ban front-of-shirt gambling ads) will mean a reduction of around 20% of their total commercial revenues.”

| Premier League clubs’ kit sponsors by category.

1. Gambling
2. Finance
3. Airline
4. Food & Beverage
— Technology
— Tourism
— No Sponsor (Chelsea)

[@Footy_Headlines] pic.twitter.com/U21Rj51sLz

— Goals Side (@goalsside) October 8, 2025

Following the voluntary ban announced in 2024, West Ham signed a front-of-shirt agreement with BoyleSports for the current 2025/26 season, while Nottingham Forest did the same with Ballys.

The relative change also comes after a number of Premier League clubs received a warning on their relationships with gambling brands that are unlicensed in the United Kingdom. 

Bournemouth, Burnley, Fulham, Newcastle, and Wolves were reprimanded by the UK Gambling Commission on the risks of promoting unlicensed betting websites. 

Many of these deals came about through TGP Europe, a wider ‘white label’ gambling operator and agent, which subsequently left the British market after the Gambling Commission hit them with a £3.3m ($4.43m) fine for multiple breaches of anti-money laundering rules.

The gambling companies affiliated with TGP remained active, but they had to ensure their domains were geo-blocked for British users.

In the example of Nottingham Forest, their Kaiyun.com front-of-shirt sponsor (last season) was not accessible in the UK.

The crux of the issue is that Premier League clubs cannot determine who the ultimate owners, or beneficiaries, of these Asian-facing, non-UK regulated gambling brands are. 

The advice to the clubs from the Gambling Commission was stark: 

“You will want to continue to satisfy yourself that your sponsorship and associated advertising arrangements are legal and do not present a reputational risk to your sport.

“We would advise that any organisation engaging in sponsorship from brands that do not hold a Commission licence manage their exposure to risk. This includes satisfying themselves as to the source of the funds for the arrangement.”

As it is, Burnley (96.com), Crystal Palace (Net88), Fulham (SBOTOP), Sunderland (W88), and Wolves (DeBet) are all carrying such partners for the final season of the current arrangement.

Betting company ‘supports’ Premier League ban

Intriguingly, a BoyleSports spokesperson told Insider Sport that “we support Premier League clubs’ self-imposed ban on front-of-shirt gambling sponsorship from the 2026/27 season.”

In a nod to the changing dynamic between clubs and gambling partners, they added:

“We’re already exploring how to evolve our presence within the stadium, across digital platforms and through direct fan engagement.

“Ultimately, visibility is important, but relevance and authenticity will carry more weight in the next era of football sponsorship, and we’re committed to staying ahead of that shift.”

As for what businesses will fill the void left on the front of shirts, you can expect some movement from the big players in telecommunications, airlines, fintech, and energy. 

Another development to watch out for is the upturn in the exposure of cryptocurrency in the Premier League. 

It will be a step into the unknown for some, while most others will embrace the open arms…and piles of cash.

Last season, 14 Premier League clubs had some form of crypto partner, which is an untapped revenue source and one that will have the authorities feeling anxious. 

Just as gambling exposure is ‘reduced’, crypto will raise its head further. 

Other examples in European soccer

In Spain, La Liga is one of the major European soccer leagues, but gambling sponsorship has been completely outlawed. 

A Royal Decree in 2021 eradicated gambling sponsors from shirts and stadiums overall, vastly reducing brand visibility, but in the background, clubs, including Real Madrid, still have lucrative agreements with gambling firms that do not operate in Spain. 

Another interesting observation is the route taken by soccer clubs in Belgium, who opted to work around the new rules and removal of gambling brands on the front of shirts.

Top clubs appeared to evade new arrangements by promoting sub-brands of gambling companies on their shirts. 

Essentially, these were sports news app gateways to the main gambling website portals operated by major sponsors, but the authorities later launched further investigations and tightened their approach. 

Next season brings changes to the Premier League and its clubs’ relationships with gambling brands. 

To what extent the change is meaningful and how long the front of shirt ban lasts, remains to be seen, but a new era is on the way.

Image credit: PremierLeague/X

The post Premier League gambling shirt ban signals sponsorship shift appeared first on Our Story Insight.

“Making It Work” is a series about small-business owners striving to endure hard times.

When a young hunter died, Lanae Strovers didn’t plan a funeral service with organ music and the Lord’s Prayer. After Ms. Strovers, a director at Hamilton’s Funeral Home in Des Moines, Iowa, heard the man’s family wish for one last hunt with him, she asked a gunsmith to put his cremated remains into some shotgun shells. Then she helped the family plan a hunt in his honor.

For a beloved Little League coach, Ms. Strovers turned her funeral home into a mock baseball field, with bases, a popcorn machine and hot dogs. She created a circus — bouncy house, snow cones and all — to commemorate a child taken too soon. She hosted a cocktail hour for a woman who had been a model and fashion designer, building a runway and dressing mannequins in her clothing.

In recent decades, the national cremation rate has skyrocketed. That’s led profits from funeral services to drop. At the same time, the costs of gasoline, embalming chemicals and staffing have risen. With the steadfast industry on uncertain footing, funeral directors have been forced to innovate.

“ I don’t want to say that we’re going to become party planners,” said Ms. Strovers, who is a spokeswoman and trainer for the National Funeral Directors Association. “But I think that those two lines are crossing over and we just need to open up our thought process and be there to help the families.”

According to a 2024 N.F.D.A. report, more than half of the industry’s revenue comes from funeral planning services and the sale of items like caskets. When customers elect cremation, that revenue can be significantly lower: The median cost of a direct cremation, which doesn’t include a viewing or service, is $2,750, about a third of that of a traditional package with a casket, viewing, ceremony and burial, which is $8,300.

The N.F.D.A. cites numerous reasons behind the popularity of cremations, including cost; environmental concerns; and consumers who are less religious, more transient and increasingly averse to heavily ritualized ceremonies.

Similar to other industries, funeral homes have also had to contend with rising costs, the biggest of which is staffing. A serious shortage of licensed funeral professionals has forced some funeral homes to raise wages or expand benefits.

“You’re bringing less funds in, but you’re also short staffed,” Ms. Strovers said. “So you’re trying to hire people and offer a salary that is acceptable. It’s a balance, right?”

While some industries could seek out new customers, that’s not easy in this line of work. The rising number of deaths from baby boomers, the oldest now in their late 70s, will be offset by the cremation rate in the United States, which is expected to hit 82 percent by 2045. An analysis from IBISWorld, a research firm, predicts that industry growth will be slow, increasing at an average rate of just 1.2 percent annually over the next four years.

Walker Posey’s family has been running Posey Funeral Directors in North Augusta, S.C., for over 140 years. Though he’s in a relatively traditional and religious part of the country, Mr. Posey said the percentage of customers picking cremation is five times what it was a decade ago.

“When people choose cremation and don’t choose to have a service attached to it, then the revenue could be drastically lower,” he said. “But our operational costs remain the same.” His business still needs to maintain its building, vehicles, staff and more.

Mr. Posey’s solution has been education: informing families that, even if they opt for cremation, they can still add traditional elements such as a viewing or service. He’s also been looking into purchasing nearby funeral homes as a way to expand his customer base.

And, like Ms. Strovers, he’s been defying convention when it comes to services. One of his directors hired a group of costumed superheroes to be the greeters at a young boy’s memorial. When a popular local bartender and musician died, Mr. Posey invited several of the man’s favorite bands to play at a theater downtown. Nearly 800 people came.

Mr. Posey, an N.F.D.A. spokesman, said that his great-grandfather might be surprised by the direction the family business has taken.

“We’re no longer just a funeral company who does events,” he said. “We’re an event company who does funerals.” He believes that funerals share many similarities with weddings — and that it’s time for funeral homes to start embracing it.

Some already have a running start in that direction. More than a decade ago, Einan’s at Sunset Funeral Home in Richland, Wash., built an airy 6,000-square-foot event center with a patio and a catering menu that includes a brisket buffet and chardonnay.

It’s so unlike a traditional funeral parlor, in fact, that 10 to 20 couples hold their weddings there each year. It’s even hosted multiple proms. The events center proved so popular that Einan’s later spent $2.5 million remodeling its main funeral home — which had the dark and stuffy look of yore — in the same fashion.

The Pacific Northwest has long had some of the highest cremation rates in the country, in part because its residents tend to be less religious and more transient.

“These people that we’re serving are not wanting what we were offering 40 years ago,” said Sarah Smith, a funeral director at Einan’s. “It’s not the same people, it’s not the same wants, it’s not the same likes and tastes.”

Einan’s has adapted its approach in other ways, too. After hearing that some families couldn’t afford its full-service offerings, it created two offshoot businesses centered on low-cost cremations.

Faith Haug thinks more funeral homes should consider revamping their business models. She is the chair of the mortuary science department at Arapahoe Community College in Littleton, Colo.

Savvy funeral homes, she said, will find ways to satisfy changing tastes and tight budgets. She also sees a future in alternative arrangements, such as human composting or green burials. Companies that offer these services, she said, have “truly changed how they operate as a business to give people what they want — and it’s not a $10,000 funeral in a metal casket.”

If funeral homes fail to adapt, Ms. Haug fears that some will end up closing their doors. Others could sell out to corporations: At the moment, roughly three-quarters of funeral homes are family- or privately owned.

The one thing she’s not concerned about? That the industry will go extinct.

“Funeral service will exist until there are no people,” Ms. Haug said. “I mean, animals care for their dead — the profession is not going away. But it does look different than it used to, and it is going to continue to evolve.”

The post Funeral Homes Are Forced to Innovate as Consumer Preferences Shift appeared first on Our Story Insight.

Shares of the company, which once boasted of media mogul Oprah Winfrey as one of its top shareholders, slumped 40% in extended trading after announcing plans to file for bankruptcy as part of a reorganization plan with a group of its lenders.

WeightWatchers began as weekly weight-loss support group meeting with 400 attendees, and quickly turned into a worldwide phenomena with millions of members across the globe.

WeightWatchers once boasted of media mogul Oprah Winfrey as one of its top shareholders. REUTERS

But the rising popularity of GLP-1 drugs such as Novo Nordisk’s Wegovy and Eli Lilly’s Zepbound hit demand for its traditional weight-loss programs.

It also acquired a telehealth provider to provide weight-loss drugs in 2023, but reported a loss of $345.7 million last year, while its subscription revenues fell 5.6% year-over-year.

WW said the reorganization plan will eliminate $1.15 billion in debt from the company’s balance sheet. The company has accumulated substantial debt of around $1.6 billion.

Novo Nordisk’s Wegovy and Ozempic hit demand for the company’s traditional weight-loss programs. REUTERS

The company has estimated assets and liabilities in the range of $1 billion to $10 billion, according to the Chapter 11 petition filed in Delaware bankruptcy court.

After its rebranding to WW International in 2018, the company aimed to focus on overall wellness rather than just weight loss.

The company has estimated assets and liabilities in the range of $1 billion to $10 billion, according to the Chapter 11 petition filed in Delaware bankruptcy court. REUTERS

The company’s shares have slumped 60% since the Wall Street Journal first reported in April that the company was preparing to file for bankruptcy in the coming months.

The post WeightWatchers files for Chapter 11 bankruptcy amid shift to Ozempic appeared first on Our Story Insight.

Acosta’s days at CNN may be numbered as the former White House correspondent known for his combative coverage of President Donald Trump could be heading for the exits rather than accept a move that would see him broadcast a nightly show starting at midnight, according to the Los Angeles Times.

Another CNN staffer told Fox News Digital that Acosta was “getting hosed.”

Jim Acosta’s days at CNN may be numbered after the network offered him a time slot that would have him broadcast his show starting at midnight. CNN

“Acosta is a talented broadcaster who could handle any slot on the network,” the unnamed staffer told Fox News Digital.

“The midnight thing is shocking [but] it is what it is.”

Mark Thompson, the CNN top boss, announced a lineup reshuffle that will see Wolf Blitzer move his “Situation Room” program from the early evenings to the mornings.

Blitzer will anchor his show alongside Pamela Brown, the network confirmed on Thursday. CNN also announced that it was laying off some 200 staffers as it transitions its focus away from its linear television operation to a more digital-centered news outlet.

The shift means that Acosta’s daily program, “CNN Newsroom with Jim Acosta,” which airs weekdays at 10 a.m. Eastern Time, will be scrapped.

CNN boss Mark Thompson announced a lineup reshuffle that scrapped Acosta’s morning show. Getty Images for Warner Bros. Discovery

“We are in active discussions with Jim about a new time slot and will have more information to share soon,” a CNN spokesperson told The Post.

The proposed lineup shift was first reported last week by Oliver Darcy of the Status newsletter.

While Acosta’s move is widely perceived as a demotion given the fact that fewer people watch television in the midnight hour, a network source noted that a 12 a.m. Eastern Time show airs at 9 p.m. on the West Coast — which constitutes a prime time show in the Pacific time zone.

CNN announced on Thursday that it was laying off some 200 employees. REUTERS

If Acosta were to accept his reassignment, he could be broadcasting his show from Los Angeles, which would necessitate him and his family moving from their current home in Washington, DC, according to a network source.

The source added that the East Coast is just “one slice of CNN’s global audience” and that the media outlet is “not an Acela corridor network.”

“CNN is a global news organization that broadcasts around the world, which would need to be noted,” the source added.

The source told The Post that a move to Los Angeles is not a requirement and that Acosta could continue to broadcast from Washington, DC, if he chose to do that.

Acosta has gained a reputation as a pugnacious broadcaster after his stint as White House correspondent during the first Trump administration. AFP via Getty Images

The Post has sought comment from Acosta.

The network’s decision to move Acosta out of daytime is being perceived by some as a way to appease the Trump administration.

Start your day with the latest business news right at your fingertips

Subscribe to our daily Business Report newsletter!

Thanks for signing up!

Earlier this week, Status reported that Thompson told his roster of journalists over the weekend that they ought to refrain from “expressing outrage” while covering the Trump inauguration.

Thompson is also reported to have told his staffers that they needed to be “fair-minded” when covering Trump.

The post Jim Acosta ‘may exit’ CNN rather than accept move to graveyard shift appeared first on Our Story Insight.