Since the NCAA’s adoption of NIL policies in 2021, social media has emerged as a pivotal platform through which college athletes can monetize their personal brand. Unlike traditional endorsement pathways that prioritize athletic performance or institutional prestige, NIL earnings in the digital age increasingly depend on an athlete’s ability to cultivate a compelling online persona. Platforms like Instagram, TikTok, and YouTube allow athletes to engage directly with audiences and offer glimpses into their daily lives, training regimens, and personal values—engagement that is largely independent of athletics. This form of parasocial interaction enhances relatability and loyalty, creating valuable marketing channels for brands seeking authentic, youth-facing athletes.
The democratizing potential of social media is particularly evident in how it disrupts traditional hierarchies in college athletics. Athletes in non-revenue sports and female athletes – historically marginalized in media coverage – have been able to leverage social platforms for significant NIL success. Louisiana State University gymnast Livvy Dunne, for instance, exemplifies how a robust TikTok and Instagram following can translate into multimillion-dollar brand deals, even in the absence of mainstream sports coverage. Similarly, Stanford University soccer player Naomi Girma has used her personal platform to advocate for social justice, while also securing brand partnerships that reflect both her athletic achievements and personal values. This shift underscores how cultural capital, rather than competitive success alone, increasingly determines commercial viability in the NIL era.
However, this opportunity is not without its trade-offs. Athletes face the pressures of constant content creation and algorithmic visibility, which potentially diverts focus from their academic and athletic development. An NCAA study found that the female college athletes are targeted for online abuse three times more than their male counterparts. The content of this abuse includes sexual harassment (18%), general abuse (17%), and sexist comments (14%). Such harassment can lead to negative effects according to a study conducted by Illinois State University, which found that social media had a negative effect on female student athletes and their self-esteem.
The rise of NIL opportunities and the public-facing nature of social media have introduced complex challenges related to self-sexualization. Many athletes choose to post content that emphasizes their physical appearance—through suggestive poses, attire, or expressions—to increase visibility and attract endorsements. As Livvy Dunne noted in a New York Times, “sex sells,” as seen in social media posts that align with traditional standards of attractiveness and cater to the male gaze often performing best according to market data. However, this strategy can be a double-edged sword. Stanford’s Tara VanDerveer, one of the most successful coaches in women’s basketball, argues that when athletes prioritize appearance over athletic performance, it can become regressive—shifting attention away from their accomplishments on the field or court.1 In response to these pressures and the increased scrutiny athletes face, many universities have begun implementing NIL literacy programs and partnering with branding firms to provide guidance on legal, financial, and reputational issues.
Ultimately, social media has not only expanded the earning potential of student-athletes but also redefined the contours of amateurism itself. By turning athletes into influencers, NIL policies have blurred the line between personal identity and commercial product, embedding college athletics more deeply into the attention economy. Similarly, the increased attention on college athletics can shed more light on non-revenue or uncommon sports, such as rowing or gymnastics in the case of Livvy Dunne. This transformation raises broader questions about the role of media, labor, and equity in collegiate sports moving forward.
Team vs. Individual Debate
The rise of NIL has heightened the distinction between institutional and individual control over an athlete’s public image. Whereas team social media accounts traditionally serve as centralized platforms for promoting school spirit, game highlights, and brand cohesion, individual athlete accounts now function as vehicles for self-expression, direct engagement, and monetization. This divergence has important implications for visibility, power, and profit within collegiate athletics.
Team-managed social media pages are curated with institutional priorities in mind. Their tone is often standardized, their content regulated, and their primary objective is to promote the university’s athletic brand rather than any single player. As a result, even standout athletes may receive only limited individualized exposure through these platforms. This structure can inhibit NIL potential for less visible team members, particularly in sports where playing time or camera coverage is unevenly distributed.
In contrast, individual athlete accounts allow for direct audience cultivation and personalized storytelling. These platforms empower athletes to construct their own narratives—whether through training videos, lifestyle content, or advocacy—and to build communities that extend beyond their immediate fan base. The control over content and brand identity enables athletes to monetize partnerships on their own terms, whether through paid promotions, affiliate links, or merchandise collaborations. The more an athlete can shape their image autonomously, the more marketable they become in the NIL economy.
This distinction also reveals underlying tensions around labor and ownership. While universities benefit reputationally and financially from the success of their athletes, it is the individual who now possesses the ability to convert fame into income. In some cases, this dynamic has led to friction, as athletes with strong personal brands may seek more creative control or resist institutional messaging that conflicts with their individual voice. It also raises equity issues: team accounts often spotlight certain players disproportionately, reinforcing existing disparities in NIL access unless athletes proactively advocate for themselves.
While team pages may offer broader exposure tied to institutional prestige or fans overall, individual accounts provide the flexibility, authenticity, and autonomy that drive NIL earnings in the attention economy. The growing emphasis on personal platforms suggests a shift in power from schools to students – reshaping not only how athletes are promoted, but who ultimately profits from their labor and likeness. personalized storytelling. These platforms empower athletes to construct their own narratives—whether through training videos, lifestyle content, or advocacy—and to build communities that extend beyond their immediate fan base. The control over content and brand identity enables athletes to monetize partnerships on their own terms, whether through paid promotions, affiliate links, or merchandise collaborations. The more an athlete can shape their image autonomously, the more marketable they become in the NIL economy.
References
1: Minsberg, Talya. “As NIL Money Flows, Female Athletes Seek Equal Opportunities.” The New York Times, 8 Nov. 2022, https://www.nytimes.com/2022/11/08/sports/ncaabasketball/olivia-dunne-haley-jones-endorsements.html.
2: Dunne, Olivia. Instagram, https://www.instagram.com/livvydunne/?hl=en.
3: Girma, Naomi. Instagram, https://www.instagram.com/naomi_girma/?hl=en.
4: “Athletes Face Social Media Abuse.” Associated Press, https://apnews.com/article/social-media-abuse-athletes-49cb7c74690bd5de85b6b6b5abda249f.
5: Illinois State University. “Undergraduate Research Symposium 2021.” Illinois State University, https://ir.library.illinoisstate.edu/urs2021knr/4/.
6: Minsberg, Talya. “As NIL Money Flows, Female Athletes Seek Equal Opportunities.” The New York Times, 8 Nov. 2022, https://www.nytimes.com/2022/11/08/sports/ncaabasketball/olivia-dunne-haley-jones-endorsements.html.
7: Ogletree Deakins. “Department of Education Warns NCAA Schools That NIL Deals May Implicate Title IX Obligations.” Ogletree Deakins, https://ogletree.com/insights-resources/blog-posts/department-of-education-warns-ncaa-schools-that-nil-deals-may-implicate-title-ix-obligations/.
8: Loeb & Loeb LLP. “The State of Play for College Athlete NIL.” Loeb & Loeb, Aug. 2021, https://www.loeb.com/en/insights/publications/2021/08/the-state-of-p-l-ay-for-college-athlete-nil#:-:text=The%20National%20Collegiate%20Athletic%20Association,%20and%20their%20schools’%20NIL%20policies.
9: “Past Posts, Present Problems: Why Social Media Screening Is Critical in Sports.” Sports Business Journal, 5 May 2025, https://www.sportsbusinessjournal.com/Articles/2025/05/05/past-posts-present-problems-why-social-media-screening-is-critical-in-sports/.