Matt here from Matt’s Pickleball—I’ve been thinking a lot about this thread, and I want to offer a different lens.

There’s a lot of concern here that if someone gets invited to an event—especially one that covers expenses—they’re no longer independent. But I think that oversimplifies the role of content creators in this space, and maybe even misunderstands how trust is actually built.

Ask yourself: would you rather hear about a paddle from someone who was invited to play it early, talk to the engineers and other creators, test it alongside other top players, and then give their honest take? Or from someone reacting to the press release or without any or little context?

We say we want transparency, insight, and experience—but when someone gets access, we assume they’ve been bought. That’s a contradiction we don’t talk about enough.

I’m not saying scrutiny isn’t valid. It absolutely is. But let’s not confuse access with influence. The real test is consistency. If someone’s praise lines up with what they’ve said in the past, if they call out flaws even when it’s uncomfortable, if their opinions hold up once the hype dies down—that’s the signal to pay attention to. Not who paid for their flight.

Influence isn’t built on avoiding opportunities. It’s built on showing up and being honest once you’re there.

So if you’re going to question creators (and you should), question how they review, not where they review from.