How did critics and fans react to the 2026 alternative Super Bowl halftime performers?
Executive summary
Bad Bunny’s selection as headliner for the Apple Music Super Bowl LX halftime show on Feb. 8, 2026 provoked both enthusiastic support and intense conservative backlash: supporters include past Super Bowl performers and entertainment outlets noting his historic, mostly Spanish‑language set [1] [2] [3], while right‑wing figures and groups have framed his booking as political and even organized counterprogramming such as Turning Point USA’s “All‑American” show [4] [5] [2]. Media and cultural outlets document a mix of fan excitement, racist social‑media attacks, celebrity defenses, and explicit political responses from leaders and organizations [6] [7] [4] [2].
1. A landmark pick that thrilled many fans and artists
Bad Bunny’s announcement as the halftime headliner was widely covered as historic — the first primarily Spanish‑language solo headliner for the event — and outlets and celebrities celebrated the cultural significance, linking the decision to his global popularity and Puerto Rican heritage [1] [3] [8]. Entertainment reporting and NFL materials highlight additional pregame performers (Charlie Puth, Brandi Carlile, Coco Jones) and accessibility collaborators, underlining the NFL’s promotional push for the event [8] [9] [2].
2. Celebrity defenses and mainstream backing
Several high‑profile performers who previously appeared on Super Bowl stages publicly defended Bad Bunny. Jennifer Lopez, Shakira and others offered support and enthusiasm, and outlets report former halftime stars backing the pick even as criticism mounted [8] [2]. The NFL and partners such as Apple Music and Roc Nation remained publicly committed to the choice, framing it as a major cultural moment [1] [10].
3. A concentrated backlash from the right — political framing, not just taste
Conservative commentators and some political figures framed the choice as ideological. Right‑wing podcasters and pundits labeled Bad Bunny “anti‑ICE” or politically extreme, and major GOP leaders criticized the NFL’s decision, turning musical selection into a political controversy [4] [2]. New reporting shows this reaction was unusually intense compared with past artist announcements, in part because performers in recent years have become lightning rods in culture‑war debates [11].
4. Counterprogramming and organized alternatives
Turning Point USA announced an “All‑American Halftime Show” as an explicit counterprogramming effort after Bad Bunny’s selection, promising a show framed around “faith, family and freedom” and crowdsourcing genre preferences — signaling that the dispute moved beyond social media into organized political programming [5]. Coverage positions Turning Point USA’s event as part of a pattern of political actors using cultural events to mobilize supporters [5].
5. Racist and xenophobic responses online reported by cultural press
Teen Vogue and other outlets documented that some of the most virulent criticism took the form of racist and xenophobic attacks, criticizing Bad Bunny for singing in Spanish and attacking his politics on social platforms — a dimension that reporters flagged as part of the backlash [6]. That reporting contrasts celebrity praise and mainstream support, showing the backlash was not monolithic but included cultural bias.
6. Media analysis: culture wars meet commercial spectacle
Journalists and cultural critics framed the episode as another instance of the Super Bowl halftime show becoming a culture‑war battleground: outlets explained how previous politically resonant halftime performances set the stage for a politicized reaction this cycle, and how that dynamic amplified both criticism and defense [11] [4]. Coverage notes the scale of the event — over 100 million viewers historically — which raises stakes for both defenders and critics [4].
7. What sources don’t say — limits and missing details
Available sources do not quantify broader fan sentiment with polling numbers or comprehensive social‑media metrics, and they do not provide box‑office or TV‑rating projections tied specifically to the controversy (not found in current reporting). Detailed accounts of how turnouts at Turning Point USA’s counterprogramming compared to stadium or broadcast audiences are not in the cited reporting (not found in current reporting).
8. Why these reactions matter beyond entertainment
The coverage shows that a halftime headliner can catalyze political organizing, media narratives, and discussions about race and language in America: conservative leaders and activists used the selection to mobilize criticism and alternatives, while advocates framed the choice as cultural representation and progress [5] [2] [6]. The episode reveals the halftime show’s dual identity as both a commercial spectacle and a cultural flashpoint, and reporters from sources above treat both dimensions as central to understanding the reaction [11] [4].