Wimbledon’s chief executive has delivered a blunt but playful message on the growing influence of social media at major sporting events: yes, content creators matter, but not if they disrupt the tennis. Richard Atkinson joked that Royal Marine commandos at SW19 would love nothing more than to “sort out” influencers if they stepped out of line, while making clear the tournament will not copy the US Open’s more open approach.
The comments came as tennis continues to wrestle with a modern dilemma. Tournaments want the reach and relevance that influencers can bring, but they also want the silence, concentration and tradition that define elite tennis. At Wimbledon, the balance appears to be leaning firmly toward order first, access second.
Wimbledon draws a line on behaviour
Atkinson said Wimbledon does not have a category of accredited people called influencers, and sources have suggested that is unlikely to change any time soon. That does not mean the club is closed to the idea of digital promotion altogether. Instead, the approach is selective, controlled and, in his words, “tightly chaperoned.”
“We’re not in the world of newspapers and television anymore,” Atkinson said at Leaders Week London. “The world has changed.” His point was clear: modern sport cannot ignore online creators and social media audiences. But Wimbledon, he argued, must remain Wimbledon.
The All England Club has long sold itself on a sense of calm, respect and discipline. Atkinson backed the tournament’s traditional “self-policing” ethos, where fans are expected to understand the standards of behaviour without constant intervention. That culture, he suggested, is one of the reasons Wimbledon feels different from other major sporting events.
US Open disruption sparks a wider debate
The discussion has intensified after the US Open accredited 100 influencers and content creators for this year’s tournament. The issue gained attention when a match involving two-time champion Naomi Osaka was disrupted by a group of influencers carrying out a photo shoot. The incident triggered a wider conversation about where promotion ends and distraction begins.
Coco Gauff, the world number four, struck a measured tone when asked about the issue. She said the sport should welcome a “new demographic,” but added that the key is simple: follow the etiquette of the sport.
“It’s important to welcome a new demographic, but follow the etiquette of the sport. That’s all.”
That view appears to align closely with Wimbledon’s position. The club is not dismissing the modern audience, but it is making clear that attention-seeking behaviour has no place on the court-side lawns and immaculate surroundings of SW19.
Why Wimbledon thinks it can stay relevant
For Wimbledon, the challenge is not whether influencers exist, but how they are managed. Atkinson said the marketing team works carefully to ensure any collaboration fits the tournament’s brand and preserves what he described as Wimbledon’s “magic.”
He also pointed to the role of major commercial partners, such as Polo Ralph Lauren, whose influencer activity is allowed only under close supervision. The message is that digital promotion can be useful, but it must be filtered through the values and expectations of the championship.
That approach reflects a broader reality across sport. Brand building in the third decade of the 21st century is no longer limited to television coverage or newspaper reports. Social media creators can help reach younger and global audiences, but the setting matters. What works at the US Open may not fit the traditions of Wimbledon.
A joke with a serious edge
Atkinson’s remark about military personnel being eager to deal with influencers was delivered as a joke, but it also reinforced a serious point: Wimbledon will protect the match experience first. He compared New York’s more spontaneous atmosphere with SW19’s controlled environment, saying it would be much harder for a visitor to walk in with a ring light and start broadcasting in the middle of play.
Fans at Wimbledon will also not be allowed to bring portable ring lights, a small but symbolic sign of how the club views the issue. The ban underlines a basic principle: the action on court remains the focal point, not the camera lens.
One tennis observer could sum up the tension this way: the sport needs reach, but it cannot lose its rhythm. Another industry insight is that elite events are now brands as much as competitions, which means every access decision carries reputational weight.
Tradition, marketing and the modern audience
Wimbledon’s position is likely to appeal to purists who worry that too much content creation can cheapen a grand-slam atmosphere. At the same time, the club is not pretending the digital age does not exist. Its strategy is more selective than resistant, more managed than nostalgic.
That is what makes Atkinson’s comments so revealing. They show an institution trying to protect a century-old identity while still speaking to a generation that discovers sport through clips, creators and short-form content. In that sense, the joke about the Marines was less about confrontation and more about control.
Wimbledon’s message is straightforward: influencers may have a role, but only if they respect the occasion. In the end, the championship wants the same thing as ever — the tennis first, the noise second, and the magic intact.
