Why athletes at the 2026 Winter Olympics are finally being given more power to monetise their performances

The 2026 Winter Olympics have come at a turning point in sport in terms of how Olympians are allowed to monetise their performances. In December, the governing body the International Olympic Committee (IOC) announced that, for the first time, Olympians would have access to footage from their competitions to use for their personal branding and promotion.

In this pilot phase, the material will not be from these Milan Cortina Winter Olympics, but from the previous Games in Beijing in 2022. According to the new Olympian Highlights Programme, athletes who competed in China can have access to 60 seconds of their competition to use on their personal channels to celebrate their achievements during these Games.

But what does this mean, why does it matter, and why is it happening now?

While the permission might not sound like a big deal, the moving image of Olympic competition is the most valuable asset of the entire Olympic movement. It is highly protected due to the exclusive television rights agreements around the world, which have secured the economic fortunes of the Olympic industry for decades.

Today, the rights to the video content of the Games competitions is what makes money for the Olympic movement. The billions of pounds they generate contribute both to the Olympic programme, and also to schemes like Olympic Solidarity supporting federations and nations around the world. But this was not always the case.

In the early years of Olympic competition, broadcasters had free rein to cover the Games. This was seen as a great opportunity to share the Olympic message with the world. The sport then was treated more like news, whereas now it is predominantly entertainment, commercialised and exploited to grow the Olympic industry.

Tightly controlled media content remains the most effective way to monetise the Olympic programme. But this meant athletes could not use video material from their competitions, for fear that this could compromise the exclusivity agreed between the IOC and broadcasters.

Athletes’ frustrations

Similarly, Olympians have been severely restricted in what they can share from their Olympic experience, especially during Games time itself. The IOC Olympic Charter sets out these limitations to avoid things like ambush marketing (when a potential sponsor tries to use the Games period to promote their product in a way that undermines an official sponsor).

For Olympians with a personal sponsor, it means limiting the exposure of this affiliation during Games time, instead prioritising their official team partnership.

Loosening controls on competition videos is an important step to letting Olympians leverage their celebrity status at a time when they’re in the spotlight. Yet it also reflects a changing set of circumstances around media culture. For 20 years, there has been a steady transition of audience habits away from living room TVs towards mobile phones and social media.

This transition had caused the industry anxiety over whether it would hit viewing figures and reduce the value of rights deals. And so Olympic organisers have monitored web traffic and sent warnings to anyone infringing upon their intellectual property.

Today, that mindset is different. There is a recognition that social media amplifies the opportunity to monetise Olympic assets. Video tracking technology can intervene directly when something is posted and limit exposure of unapproved content shares. Or it can simply monetise it with adverts. These capabilities are expanding – and becoming more complicated – with the rise of artificial intelligence (AI).

Provisions for social media sharing for athletes and others with accreditation have been evolving over recent Games. At the London 2012 Olympics, IOC social media guidelines did not allow any video from Olympic venues to be posted. In contrast, for Paris 2024, athletes were allowed to share video of their Olympic journey (but not their performance) with up to two minutes from each competition venue.

The guidance for Milan Cortina goes even further to encourage sharing. But it still prohibits athletes from posting this premium video content between one hour before competition and within one hour after, the crucial window for broadcasters.

Ultimately, giving permission to use video from the Games events is also about recognising the athletes’ own ability to attract audiences. On the days leading to Paris 2024, behind-the-scenes footage from athletes often became prominent social media posts, including viral footage of the athletes’ cardboard beds.

This showed candid moments from athletes before the TV coverage began. Audiences appeared to love this – and leaning into it is crucial for the Olympic movement in these changing times.

For decades, the IOC has shouted about how far the Olympic message travels during each Games, articulating this in terms of television hours watched across the world. Yet, television has changed too. After Rio 2016, there was a shift in the IOC’s language, moving from “television” to “live-streamed” hours, to reflect the new ways in which audiences are exposed to the Olympic Games.

The economic direction of international sport and the growing importance of non-traditional partnerships, such as those with Airbnb, Uber and Alibaba, show that the future of the Olympic Games is wedded to the technological culture of the time. While the technology of the 20th century was television, now sport is intimately connected to the rise of AI. Its integration within social media will be key to how users create and consume Olympic content.

In this way, 60 seconds of footage from a previous Olympic competition is not just a move towards empowering athletes. It is also a step towards safeguarding the future of the Olympic Games at a time of remarkable change in the media. The influencer economy is becoming the new unit of audience attraction and it’s crucial that the Olympic movement embraces this.

Andy Miah does not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organisation that would benefit from this article, and has disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.