Commend Bad Bunny, Not the NFL

Rihanna(2023), Usher (2024), Kendrick Lamar (2025): Bad Bunny (2026). The lineup brings in people from a wide array of backgrounds. Many who aren't even football inclined tune into the sensationalized show critiquing, analyzing, and supporting the performers. However, as of late, the Super Bowl halftime show has reeled in a significant amount of political discourse. Although it may not be intentional, many performers have started making a habit out of expressing their political ties in their performances. 

In 2025, Kendrick Lamar critiqued America, coming from a position that raised awareness to the systemic injustices Black Americans face by conglomerate organizations. Ironically enough, a case can be made that the NFL fits under that money hungry depiction. However, to suppress the irony, it seems the NFL points to their progressiveness in choosing Halftime performers to depict themselves favourably. In reality, it's a guise. In January of this year, the NFL fined Houston Texans linebacker Azeez Al-Shaair for wearing a stop the genocide eyeblack. While in isolation I don’t agree with the action taken, if the NFL decides to forgo politics in the sport it's their prerogative, even if unethical. However, in 2023 when Greg Joseph wore Israel cleats, clearly expressing a political view, he was met with no backlash from the organization. It's a double standard that picks and chooses. Shameful. 

bad bunny

Photo: Bad Bunny Representing His Nation. Photo Courtesy of New York Times

Bad Bunny Representing His Nation. Photo Courtesy of New York Times

Bad Bunny’s Performance

In this year's performance, it's the same thing all over again. Using Bad Bunny to show the masses they “care” about its latino viewers. When, in reality, they're trying to expand the markets into a new audience. Bad Bunny is the only person in this whole debacle that feels genuine. Before he was even chosen, he released the venues for an upcoming tour. However, none were in the United States. It was a surprise, considering he is an American himself, so many questioned it. It resulted in him outwardly denouncing ICE. He explained that his audience, which is significantly latino, would be in danger if he performed in the U.S. To me, it was a consistent position, one that the NFL does not show.

Unsurprisingly, the pushback was strong. Most of them because they view his actions as divisive and not belonging at a “unifying” national event. However, I would argue these “political stunts,” are exactly what the nation needs, specifically for an underrepresented and historically persecuted community. While I dislike that the NFL gains recognition, the performance was so important for the Latino community. The demographics watching the NFL are, for the majority, white At 60%. Also, 71% of watchers are 35 and older. So as demographic trends go, it's more likely viewers lean right and hold conservative values. Exposing them to some form of hispanic culture humanizes the immigrants that are being unjustifiably treated.

In his performance, Bad Bunny took the perfect approach to showing Latino culture: not being overly political, but taking a side. In his opening, it seems like you're taking a stroll through different Latino neighborhoods. From the beginning you could tell he wanted to resolve things amicably. Not ostracizing anti-immigration, but trying to give them a semblance of what It means to be latino. While a full throttle political manifesto would have been interesting, it's a respectable stance. He does this all while paying homage to latinos, making us reminisce about childhood, by showing a child sleeping at a wedding. The final victory lap moment nearing the end of his performance wrapped up his intentions, making it clear that his performance should not be analyzed for its political aspirations, but what it means to be a Latino.