Bad Bunny turned the Super Bowl LX halftime show into a statement about identity and language, centring Puerto Rico and Spanish-language music on one of the world’s biggest stages. The performance drew praise for its cultural focus, criticism from U.S. conservatives, and an immediate spike in global streaming—reverberations that were felt well beyond the United States.

A Puerto Rican “love letter” on the NFL’s biggest stage

In Santa Clara’s Levi’s Stadium, Bad Bunny (Benito Antonio Martínez Ocasio) delivered a halftime set that leaned heavily into Puerto Rican imagery and Latin rhythms, using the spectacle not just to entertain but to frame “America” as something larger than the United States. El País reported that the show combined a vivid homage to Puerto Rico with a direct cultural argument: Spanish, dance, and Latin popular culture can occupy the country’s most symbolic mainstream stage without apology.

Reuters described the performance as a “Puerto Rican love letter,” with theatrical scenes referencing island life and a setlist anchored in reggaeton and Latin pop. The appearance of surprise guests—reported as including Lady Gaga and Ricky Martin—added to the sense that the halftime show was designed as a cross-genre, cross-audience moment rather than a niche cultural showcase.

Politics arrives at halftime

Within hours, the show became part of the U.S. political conversation. In a widely circulated reaction, former U.S. President Donald Trump criticised the halftime show as “absolutely terrible,” a line that pushed the debate beyond artistic taste and into the culture-war terrain that often surrounds immigration, language, and national identity. Reuters reported that Trump’s criticism followed earlier objections to the NFL’s decision to book Bad Bunny, underscoring how quickly a music performance can become a political symbol.

For European readers, the dynamic is familiar: large public events frequently become proxies for broader disputes about identity, integration, and who gets to define a nation’s “mainstream.” The difference, in this case, is the scale—an entertainment segment watched worldwide, capable of turning a language and identity debate into a global headline.

The measurable impact: streaming spikes across borders

Whatever the politics, the market reaction was immediate. Associated Press reported that Apple Music data showed a sharp post-show surge, with multiple Bad Bunny tracks entering global charts and his album Debí Tirar Más Fotos charting across a large number of countries, including major European markets such as Spain and Germany.

Apple itself highlighted “unprecedented engagement” tied to the performance, describing a spike in simultaneous listeners right after halftime and record attention around related content. In practical terms, the halftime show functioned as a live demonstration of how a single televised cultural moment can be converted into platform-scale listening behaviour within minutes.

Why Europe is paying attention

For Europe’s music industry—and for policymakers debating the power of streaming platforms—the episode offers a real-time case study. Spanish-language repertoire is no longer a side-stream: it is a global mainstream force that can dominate the biggest broadcast window available. That matters in a European context where cultural diversity is often discussed as policy, but rarely tested at this scale in a single moment.

It also matters socially. Across European cities, Latin American and Caribbean communities have grown in recent decades, shaping nightlife, festivals, and popular culture. A halftime show built around Puerto Rican identity becomes, indirectly, a visibility moment for those communities—proof that their cultural references can travel, translate, and lead global conversation.

Critics split on style, but not on significance

In the immediate aftermath, debate also played out in cultural criticism. The New York Times’ critics roundup captured a familiar divide—what worked, what didn’t, and whether the spectacle matched the halftime tradition. But even the “best/worst” framing acknowledged the underlying reality: the performance was not only a concert, it was a statement, and it successfully forced a conversation about language, belonging, and the meaning of “America.”