In recent weeks, the decision to name Bad Bunny as the headliner for the Super Bowl LX halftime show has sparked fierce discussion across media, politics, and pop culture. While supporters praise the move as a breakthrough in representation, critics have questioned whether a Spanish-language artist fits the “all-American” spectacle.
Enter Stephen Colbert, who — via a mock press release, social media, and a hypothetical monologue — has thrown his comedic weight behind Bad Bunny. Colbert’s take offers both a spirited defense and a sharp social commentary: this is more than a performance choice. It’s a statement about culture, identity, and what “America” means in 2025.
The Controversy: Bad Bunny, Super Bowl, and the Backlash
The NFL, in partnership with Apple Music and Jay-Z’s Roc Nation, confirmed in late September that Bad Bunny would headline the 2026 Super Bowl halftime show at Levi’s Stadium in Santa Clara, California. His announcement has been met with a mix of excitement and resistance.
Many in the Latino community, as well as numerous celebrities (Jennifer Lopez, Shakira, Bruno Mars, among others), publicly applauded the choice, calling it a milestone for cultural visibility.
But some backlash has come from conservative commentators and political figures, who argue that featuring a Spanish-language artist (especially one who has openly criticized U.S. immigration policy) is “too political,” or that Bad Bunny does not represent traditional American values.
American History Books
Some critics have even floated replacing him with a country music legend like George Strait or Lee Greenwood, citing a “clean” and “safe” presentation of U.S. culture. Meanwhile, threats of immigration enforcement at the Super Bowl venue have been raised by public officials, pointing to fears about who attends and under what protections.
In the middle of this, a quote — widely circulated online — purported to be from former NFL star Jason Kelce: “If Bad Bunny isn’t a fit for the Super Bowl, then maybe the people making that comment aren’t a fit for the future of America.” That quote, however, has since been determined to have been misattributed or fabricated, and Kelce publicly denied ever making it.
Still, the idea behind that quote — that rejecting an artist like Bad Bunny reflects an exclusionary definition of America — has resonated, especially with those advocating for broader representation on the world’s biggest stage.
Colbert’s Hypothetical Address: Why Bad Bunny Does Belong
(Opening) — The Stage Must Change
If Stephen Colbert were to deliver a monologue on his show or post a statement, here’s how it might begin:
“Let’s get real: when people say ‘Bad Bunny doesn’t belong at the Super Bowl,’ what they’re really saying is ‘This show should only look like the America I remember.’ But America doesn’t stay the same. It evolves. It listens to more voices, more languages, more rhythms.”
Right from the start, Colbert would frame the issue not as a mere entertainment decision, but as a symbolic choice about inclusivity and American identity.
(Middle) — Humor, Irony, and Facts
Colbert might contrast the idea that “some artists are too foreign” with a dash of satire:
“We’ve seen halftime shows with pop diva pyrotechnics, rock ballads dragged out by guitar solos, and surprise guest cameos. It’s 2026 — the only thing that should be alien is Mars, not the music.
Bad Bunny’s global streaming numbers, his sold-out shows, his influence across generations — the man is the reason your mom’s cousin is now asking you to teach them Spanish. That’s power. That’s reach.
And for those saying you can’t sing in Spanish at the Super Bowl — come on. English was once controversial in this country. We got past that. We can get past this too.”
He might underscore key facts: that Bad Bunny is the first primarily Spanish-language solo artist to headline the Super Bowl halftime show. He might also mention how prior halftime shows have pushed boundaries — from rock to hip hop to pop spectacles — and that the show’s role is to reflect the time, not mimic nostalgia.
(Turning Point) — Casting the Criticism as Cultural Anxiety
Colbert would likely pivot from humor to critique:
“What we’re seeing now is less about Bad Bunny and more about anxiety — anxiety about change, about shifting demographics, about who ‘counts’ as American. If your reaction to a Spanish song is fear or suspicion, that’s not music you’re protecting — it’s your comfort zone.”
American History Books
He could use a device he’s used in the past: employing a fake sidebar (à la The Wørd) that undercuts his own sarcasm. (Even in his “non-Colbert Report” era, his style retains echoes of that structure.)
(Closing) — A Vision of America’s Stage
Colbert might finish with an appeal:
“So here’s my message to NFL decision makers, critics, and fans who say this is ‘too much’: you’re wrong. Bad Bunny is part of America. He is the sound of change, of bilingual neighborhoods, of playlists that refuse boundaries.
If the Super Bowl wants to stay in 1955, maybe we should just broadcast Dixieland tunes for the halftime. But if it wants to be America 2026 — loud, diverse, inclusive, proud — then Bad Bunny is exactly the right choice.
So to those critics saying he’s ‘not a fit’ — I say: maybe you’re the one out of tune.”
Why Colbert’s Voice Matters
Stephen Colbert is known for blending satire, sharp wit, and political insight. His style — honed from The Colbert Report through The Late Show — often holds up cultural tension points and says: look, this is what your fears or biases look like when we turn them into jokes.
While we don’t have an actual Colbert statement supporting Bad Bunny just yet (as of now), the imagined version captures how he might intervene: as a cultural commentator, using humor to expose why rejecting Bad Bunny is less about music and more about who we choose to include in the story of America.
Likely Reactions and Stakes
From fans and artists: Many will cheer. Bad Bunny already has vocal supporters in the entertainment world. Jennifer Lopez, for instance, urged critics to “give him a chance” and reminded audiences that “art transcends language.”
From critics and skeptics: Colbert’s mock takedown would likely provoke backlash from those who feel the Super Bowl should maintain a conventional musical identity. Some may see his intervention as exaggerated or overly political.
From the broader culture: A Colbert-style defense might help shift the framing away from “Should Bad Bunny perform?” to “What kind of America do we want to see on our biggest stages?” And that framing could influence how media, advertisers, and fans talk about representation, music, and belonging.
Leave a Reply