Two creators had their US Open credentials revoked in 2026 after it turned out they'd been let in through a food vendor's staff list, not the official media or creator channel. That incident, plus a run of on-court etiquette complaints through the tournament, pushed the All England Club to announce it will not create a dedicated creator accreditation category for the 2027 Wimbledon Championships. For a brand sending creators to a sponsored event, there's one thing to verify before the next brief: exactly which access category a creator is entering under, and whose name is on the list.
What exactly happened at the US Open?
The USTA's creator credential program nearly doubled in a year — from 54 credentials issued in 2025 to roughly 100 in 2026. Friction showed up early. During Naomi Osaka and Anastasia Zakharova's first-round match, a group in a suite lit up a bright ring light while filming, forcing chair umpire Kader Nouni to stop play and address the crowd directly. Later reporting indicated that suite group hadn't come in through the official creator credential path at all. Other players, including Coco Gauff and Jessica Pegula, publicly called out crowd noise and camera equipment as problems during the tournament.
Why did the two creators actually lose their credentials?
New York-based creators Meg Radice and Audrey Jongens had their US Open credentials revoked after they posted photos of their passes on Instagram. USTA spokesperson Brendan McIntyre said the two "were not credentialed as media or content creators," explaining they'd been improperly included on a staff list submitted by a food vendor.
"They were not credentialed as media or content creators. They were improperly submitted for credentials on a staff list provided by a food vendor." — USTA spokesperson Brendan McIntyre
That detail matters for brands because it shows the risk doesn't live only inside a tournament's official creator program. Sponsor suites, hospitality invites, vendor-managed lists — every commercial access point carries the same exposure. Until the tournament cross-checked the list after the fact, nobody could tell from the outside whether a creator who came in this way was properly credentialed or just slipped onto someone else's roster.
Why isn't this just a US Open problem?
On September 7, 2026, the All England Club announced it will not introduce a dedicated accreditation category for creators or influencers at the 2027 Wimbledon Championships, and said it will enforce existing rules against equipment that could distract players, ring lights included. Osaka acknowledged creators can bring in audiences who wouldn't otherwise follow tennis, while arguing their presence needs better management; Gauff welcomed the new demographics but stressed that creators — and the brands working with them — need to understand and respect tennis etiquette. What this response shows is that a major event's stance on creator access can change between seasons. An event that had a dedicated creator lane last year may not have one this year, and that's something a brand has to re-check per event, per season — not assume carries over.
Where does the risk actually sit for a brand?
Three places. First, access risk: a creator who entered through a vendor or hospitality list can have their credential pulled once the event cross-checks that list — and that can happen mid-event, while a campaign is already live. Second, content-loss risk: when a credential is revoked, the content that creator was there to make disappears with it, and if the contract doesn't address that case, payment, reshoot, and refund terms get negotiated after the fact, under pressure. Third, reputational risk: when high-profile figures like Osaka or Gauff call out the problem publicly, the brand that booked the creator can get named alongside it. One brand reportedly sent etiquette guidelines to its invited influencers after this incident — reactively, not before dispatch.
What should go into the next event brief and contract?
Check these before dispatch.
- Confirm exactly which category the creator is entering under. An official media/creator credential, a sponsor-suite or hospitality guest, or a vendor-managed staff/guest list — the three carry different rules and different revocation risk.
- Re-verify, every season, whether the event even has a dedicated creator category. If it doesn't (as with Wimbledon now), general guest or hospitality rules apply instead, and equipment or live-filming restrictions there can differ from the creator path.
Add these to the brief and contract:
- Put the credential submission channel and the person responsible in writing. Record who submitted the request, on which list, through which channel — so it's traceable if something goes wrong.
- Brief equipment and conduct rules in writing before dispatch, not after an incident — while the creator can still act on it.
- Add a clause for on-site access revocation. Agree payment, reshoot, and schedule terms in advance, not after the fact.
- Build in a per-event, per-season re-check of the venue's creator policy. Assume a category that existed last year may not exist this year.
Example (a hypothetical, not a reported figure): send 5 creators to one event, and if 1 loses access on-site over a channel problem, you've lost roughly 20% of the planned content. Spending 10 minutes per creator on access verification before dispatch — 50 minutes total — is cheaper than unwinding that loss after the fact.
Event access rules change outside a brand's control. What a brand can still verify is whether the creator was actually driving the campaign in the first place. Want to check your whole roster against real sales contribution? Get started.
