After Puerto Rican superstar Bad Bunny headlined the Super Bowl LX halftime show — performed nearly entirely in Spanish — several Republican lawmakers criticized the performance and are demanding formal action.
House Republicans led by Rep. Andy Ogles (R-Tenn.) have called for a congressional investigation into the NFL and broadcaster NBCUniversal, claiming the performance included “explicit and indecent content” that they say should not have been aired during a family-oriented broadcast. They labeled the show “pure smut” and argued authorities should probe its approval and potential violations of broadcast standards.
- Florida Rep. Randy Fine also declared the show “illegal,” asserting that if the same content had been presented in English it would have resulted in fines or removal from the air.
- Some lawmakers have even suggested FCC action, including fines and license reviews for the NFL, NBC, and Bad Bunny — pushing an unusually aggressive critique of artistic content on live television.
- This political response marks a rare instance of elected officials attacking not just the content of a halftime show, but also broadcasting decisions and cultural expression more broadly.
What Sparked the Outrage?
The controversy stems mainly from three factors:
1. Language Barrier
Bad Bunny performed almost exclusively in Spanish. Some critics argued that English-speaking viewers were unable to understand the lyrics, leading to outcry when translations of original song versions suggested sexual themes or profanity. However, fact-checking sources note that explicit lyrics were not necessarily aired verbatim during the live performance, and edits were made to avoid violations of broadcast standards.
2. Perception of Sexual and Provocative Content
Republican critics claimed the show included provocative dancing, sexual choreography, and visual elements they deemed inappropriate for broadcast. These interpretations echoed past controversies around halftime performances but were amplified because of the language difference and unfamiliarity with the cultural context.
3. Cultural and Political Framing
Some of the backlash also intersects with broader cultural debates around national identity. Critics said the Spanish-language show was “not unifying” for all Americans, while supporters argued it represented diversity and inclusivity.
Responses From Other Public Figures
Not all commentary has been critical. Voices from media and entertainment have pushed back against the outrage:
- Jon Stewart and other late-night hosts mocked the conservative backlash, suggesting that demanding a halftime show unify a nation or conform linguistically was unreasonable.
- Stephen A. Smith defended expressing personal opinions about the cultural impact of the show and rejected efforts to “cancel” commentators for discussing it.
- Jessica Alba praised Bad Bunny’s performance, celebrating its cultural expression and impact.
- These responses highlight how the debate has become as much about cultural values and media criticism as about the performance itself.
Cultural Impact and Broader Debate
Bad Bunny’s halftime show — watched by an estimated over 128 million viewers — was historic for being one of the first major Super Bowl performances delivered almost entirely in a language other than English. Supporters say it showcased Latin American culture and diversity on one of the world’s most-watched entertainment stages. Critics argue that unfamiliar language and perceived provocative elements made them uncomfortable, while supporters see the reaction as part of a broader resistance to cultural change. This dispute reflects larger tensions in American society about language, representation, media standards, and national identity — making it more than just a disagreement about a football halftime show.
