Content creators drop the ball
A crowd of content creators disrupted play at the US Open this week, with an umpire forced to pause Naomi Osaka's match against Anastasia Zakharova after influencers in a luxury suite became too loud, while others reportedly asked staff to take flash photographs during matches. The incident has reignited debate about whether influencers belong at exclusive sporting events, though much of that criticism overlooks that brands themselves choose to bring creators to such occasions and must anticipate the disruption that can follow.
The United States Tennis Association said it had almost doubled the number of credentialed content creators this year, to close to 100 from 54 in the previous edition, though it stressed that those responsible for the disruptions were not officially credentialed. Two lifestyle influencers, Meg Radice and Audrey Jongens, had their access revoked after posting images of their badges online, with the USTA saying they had been improperly added to a credential list by a food vendor. The row comes as US creator advertising spend reached $37 billion (£29 billion) in 2025 and is forecast to hit $44 billion (£35 billion) this year, and follows a 2024 rule change allowing US Open spectators to move around more freely during play; the USTA has since put up new signage asking attendees to avoid flash photography.
- Influencers disrupted Naomi Osaka's US Open match, prompting umpire intervention
- USTA says disruptive creators were not officially credentialed for the event
- Incident highlights brands' growing reliance on influencers at exclusive events
New here? Start with this
Content creators, or "influencers," are people who build an online following by posting photos and videos, often paid by brands to promote products at high-profile events. Sports organisers increasingly hand out press-style credentials to these creators to attract younger audiences and social media buzz, and the US Open is one such event where their presence has been growing sharply this year.
Naomi Osaka is a well-known professional tennis player who was competing at the tournament when the disruption occurred. The US Open is organised by the United States Tennis Association (USTA), which manages accreditation for anyone filming or photographing inside the venue, including both journalists and content creators.
This matters because it touches on a wider tension in sport: as advertisers pour billions into influencer marketing, venues are having to balance the commercial appeal of hosting online personalities against the need to preserve a quiet, professional atmosphere for players and traditional spectators.
Both sides, in good faith
The strongest fair case each way — we don't pick a winner.
The case for
Those sympathetic to the influencers argue that brands and organisers, not the creators themselves, set the terms of engagement: it was the USTA that nearly doubled credentialed content-creator numbers and a vendor that mistakenly added extra names to the list, so responsibility for any disruption lies with the institutions granting access rather than with attendees behaving as invited guests naturally would in a newly relaxed, more mobile viewing environment. They would add that live posting and flash photography are simply how a modern audience engages with an event, reflecting a $37 billion creator economy that tournaments themselves are eager to court for exposure and revenue.
The case against
Critics who favour stricter limits argue that elite sport depends on a hushed, undistracted atmosphere for players to perform, and that repeated noise and flash photography during live points directly undermines fair competition and respect for athletes like Osaka and Zakharova. They would contend that credentialed access to exclusive suites is a privilege carrying an obligation to observe basic etiquette, and that the sheer scale of expansion, alongside lapses such as improperly issued badges, shows organisers have prioritised commercial reach over protecting the integrity and enjoyment of the event for players and paying spectators alike.