When the NFL announced Bad Bunny as the 2026 Super Bowl halftime headliner, many conservatives saw more than a music choice — they saw a message. The league is no longer simply putting on a show, it’s endorsing a particular cultural direction. That’s uncomfortable for people who want their national institutions to reflect shared values.
For decades halftime shows featured widely recognized legends whose music crossed generations and languages. Now the league has handed the spotlight to a performer who represents a very specific set of identities and aesthetics. That shift matters because the Super Bowl is one of the few true national moments left.
Jason Whitlock’s reaction captures the anger on the right, and it’s worth parsing. “They have selected a Latin, gay, hip-hop, gangster, trap music, no-english-speaking rapper to perform at the Super Bowl this year. His name is Bad Bunny. I had heard the name,” Whitlock says. Those sentences land like a cultural diagnosis from someone who feels the public square is being remade without consent.
Whitlock goes farther, connecting the choice to broader power players. “And once you start going down the rabbit hole, this is a demonic rapper selected by Jay-Z and the National Football League to promote demonic activity. And I think it’s a reaction in part, partially, to what the Charlie Kirk assassination sparked,” he continues, noting that it was a “terrific moment of religious revival.” This is intense language, but it reflects a real fear that institutions are serving as vehicle for ideological change.
The influence of Jay-Z on NFL programming since 2020 is a frequent conservative talking point. Critics point out his business deals with the league and wonder if artistic choices reflect corporate alliances rather than mainstream taste. That suspicion feeds the argument that halftime is no longer entertainment; it’s messaging.
There’s also a geographic and political angle conservatives are quick to make. Whitlock notes, “And the Super Bowl this year is in Northern California, and that is the headquarters of Gavin Newsom and Kamala Harris and Nancy Pelosi and just this whole revolutionary Marxist left-wing. That’s their headquarters, Northern California.” Whether you agree with the phrasing or not, the point is that location and cultural leadership feel aligned to many on the right.
Bad Bunny’s stage persona and aesthetic are central to the controversy, and conservatives see it as a provocation. He’s known for bending gender expectations and presenting sexuality in ways that make traditionalists uneasy. That’s the core of the argument: this isn’t merely artistic choice, it’s cultural instruction.
Whitlock doesn’t mince words about the role of certain music executives. “This is an unapologetic drug dealer,” Whitlock says of Jay-Z. “Says that he was involved in violence and murder, but we’ve placed him on a pedestal. Him and all of his demonic music. We’ve placed him on a pedestal in the National Football League. The most powerful force in American culture.” Those are heavy accusations intended to shock and politicize the conversation surrounding halftime.
Language, too, is a flashpoint. Whitlock asserts, “And so Bad Bunny, Puerto Rican rapper, not one song does he sing in English. Not one. So we’re about to have a halftime show where most of the audience will have no idea what’s going on.” This taps into nationalists’ concerns about shared culture and the expectation that a national event speaks to all Americans.
Concerns about gender expression and how it’s displayed on a stage watched by families are front and center for critics. “But I guarantee you, Bad Bunny’s going to put on a drag show at halftime because that’s how he got there. By redefining masculinity, by dressing in women’s clothing, by pretending, well, ‘I’m not gay, I’m sexually fluid,’” Whitlock continues. Conservatives frame this as a calculated normalization of trends they reject for children and communities.
Whitlock points to specific imagery to make his case, noting visual choices in music videos. In one music video, Bad Bunny does dress in drag, going as far to wear what appears to be pounds of makeup and giant fake breasts. That visual is used as evidence by those who say the Super Bowl will showcase a radical aesthetic shift.
For conservatives, this is not only about one performer but about what institutions choose to celebrate. The NFL as a cultural institution has enormous influence over taste and norms. When that institution appears to side with a narrow cultural expression, many feel excluded.
Religion and moral language appear heavily in conservative responses, and Whitlock leans into that. “The National Football League is going to put on a halftime drag show,” Whitlock says, disturbed. “I can’t do it. And I’m telling you, I love football, but I fear God more than I love football. They’re grooming our babies. We’re going to pay a price for this.” These words are intended to rally people who see cultural decay as existential.
There’s a strategic political element at work for conservatives bothered by the choice. They see an opportunity to push back at institutions that increasingly reflect progressive cultural tastes. The argument is not about censoring art, it’s about preserving common cultural ground and family-friendly national moments.
What’s missing in the debate is a clear path forward for those who feel alienated. Boycotts, complaints to advertisers, and vocal criticism are tools the right will likely use, but they have mixed historical success. The deeper solution conservatives seek is a restoration of institutions that prioritize unity and traditional cultural touchstones.
The Bad Bunny halftime announcement didn’t happen in a vacuum; it’s part of a broader cultural fight over who gets to define America. For many on the right, it signals the NFL’s alignment with a cultural agenda that feels foreign and deliberate. That’s why this story matters beyond music and halftime entertainment.
