Every year, in that dismal stretch between winter and spring, we gather around our televisions—snacks in tow—to watch the Super Bowl. For some, it's all about the game, while for others, it's solely about the halftime show.
This year’s halftime show will feature Los Angeles rapper Kendrick Lamar — fresh off his five-time Grammy-winning streak for "Not Like Us" — who will be joined by SZA, a frequent collaborator, for a performance in New Orleans that's already backed by plenty of buzz. Although the central purpose of Sunday's game is to see who will come out on top in the highly anticipated rematch between the Philadelphia Eagles and the Kansas City Chiefs, it isn’t the only reason many will endure the hours-long broadcast, but that wasn't always the case.
Before celebrated artists like Lamar and SZA commanded the Super Bowl stage before millions, the halftime show was a much smaller production—primarily featuring marching bands with no accompanying singers. Since the first Super Bowl in 1967, the show has evolved with the times, eventually becoming the grand, Jay-Z-led Roc Nation production that audiences eagerly anticipate each year.
In an interview with Salon, Joanna Love, an Associate Professor of Music at the University of Richmond and an expert on Super Bowl broadcasts, discussed how the commercialization of contemporary pop music has shaped the halftime show. According to Love, familiarity is key for the NFL and its advisers, as the show is designed to appeal to white middle-class viewers. This emphasis on mass appeal explains why controversies such as Janet Jackson’s infamous 2004 wardrobe malfunction involving Justin Timberlake and Beyoncé’s politically charged "Formation" performance in 2016, sparked such swift backlash.
Read Salon's interview with Love below to learn which artists ultimately transformed the way audiences experience the halftime show.
The following transcript has been edited for length and clarity.
How did the Super Bowl transition from marching band performers to some of the biggest artists in the world? When did that change happen? And why?
It happened slowly over many years. Even in the very first Super Bowl—though we don't have much footage of it—we do have recordings of marching bands creating a spectacle on the field. Bands have long been associated with the military, and by extension, with American sports. So, incorporating them into the Super Bowl halftime show and pre-game events was a natural progression.
Over time, contemporary popular music became increasingly commercialized. In the 1970s, specials like Super Night at the Super Bowl began featuring contemporary stars. Figures like Joe Namath hosted these programs, performing in quirky skits alongside musicians like Henry Mancini.
By the 1980s, advertising had become intertwined with entertainment. The famous 1984 Apple commercial was a major moment, drawing advertisers' attention to the Super Bowl. That same year, the convergence of advertising and the music industry became even clearer—Michael Jackson starred in Pepsi commercials featuring a reworked version of "Billie Jean." While these ads weren’t aired during the Super Bowl, they reflected a growing synergy between pop music and corporate sponsorship. Since advertising pays for television broadcasts, integrating popular music into commercials became a logical next step.
"The Super Bowl halftime show has always been shaped by a complex web of media, corporate sponsorships and broadcast networks. Since television rights rotate among different networks, each has influenced the show’s evolution in unique ways."
By the early '90s, major artists like Ray Charles were starring in high-profile Super Bowl ads, such as his Diet Pepsi campaign. Meanwhile, halftime performances still featured acts like jazz musician Al Hirt and other classical or traditional artists. But by the late '80s, pop stars like Diana Ross, New Kids on the Block, and Neil Diamond started appearing, gradually shifting the halftime show’s focus.
In 1992, Gloria Estefan headlined a halftime show that also featured Olympic ice skaters, but it struggled in the ratings, losing viewers to "In Living Color." This prompted the NFL to rethink its approach. Realizing they needed a corporate sponsor, they partnered with Frito-Lay and brought in Michael Jackson as the headliner. Jackson, known for his extravagant stage presence, revolutionized the halftime show’s spectacle. However, the shift wasn’t immediate—after his performance, some halftime productions still featured Disney-style shows that didn’t resonate as well.
In the early 2000s, the NFL experimented with jam-packed lineups, bringing together acts like Aerosmith and Britney Spears. It took time to refine the concept of a single headliner, but by the 21st century, that format became standard. The moment when Jay-Z’s Roc Nation took over truly solidified the modern halftime show’s structure. However, the groundwork had been laid earlier, particularly by MTV, which produced several halftime shows, including Janet Jackson’s infamous 2004 performance. After that controversy, MTV was no longer involved in production.
The Super Bowl halftime show has always been shaped by a complex web of media, corporate sponsorships and broadcast networks. Since television rights rotate among different networks, each has influenced the show’s evolution in unique ways.
Does the city where the Super Bowl is held ultimately inspire the halftime show?
It can be like Michael Jackson's performance at the LA Rose Bowl—the heart of the music industry and not far from where he lived. That was a clear connection. Similarly, when Shakira and J.Lo performed in Miami, the location made sense given the city's strong Latin American influence and diverse immigrant population. That show resonated with the audience there.
It doesn’t always align that way. In some cases, the choice of National Anthem performer reflects the location more than the halftime show lineup. For example, Katy Perry’s performance took place in Arizona, where there wasn’t an obvious connection. Ultimately, it just depends.
Why do we sit around every year to watch this game and performance even if we don't like football?
Nielsen ratings reflect these trends clearly. They track who tunes in for the game, the commercials, and the halftime show. Streaming data enhances this tracking as well.
There’s typically a significant uptick in viewership during the halftime show, followed by a sharp drop-off in the third quarter. However, this decline depends on how close the game is. Even prime advertising spots are usually placed within the first two quarters for maximum impact.
Why was New Kids on The Block the first major artist to perform at the Super Bowl?
The best way to frame this is that the artists chosen by the NFL, the network, and the sponsors are always aimed at appealing to the broadest possible audience. In the 20th century, that typically meant catering to the white middle class. While this has evolved over time, the goal remains to select performers who can appeal across age groups without being controversial.
New Kids on the Block, for example, worked because they attracted young kids and teens, who in turn encouraged their parents to tune in. In the 1980s, while many households had multiple television sets, TV-watching was still a family activity—especially on Sundays—which influenced these programming choices.
"The artists chosen by the NFL, the network, and the sponsors are always aimed at appealing to the broadest possible audience."
It’s unclear whether other artists declined first or if the timing simply worked out, but when someone like Diana Ross was chosen, it made sense. She delivered a spectacular show, and she already had an established following. Berry Gordy had built Motown to appeal to white middle-class audiences, ensuring Ross’s performance would be a safe, mainstream choice.
Ultimately, whenever we analyze these decisions, we have to consider the role of advertising and sponsorship—because, at the end of the day, the audience itself is what’s being sold.
When did the halftime show really explode and become a full-fledged production?
Michael Jackson’s performance was a turning point, but there’s a reason for that. Even before his show, there’s something fascinating to note—those early halftime shows in the late ’60s were produced by the same creators behind Disneyland parades and their large-scale spectacles. The idea of the halftime show as an entertaining spectacle has always been there. However, what entertains a live audience in the stadium differs from what works on national television, and the technology needed to bridge that gap had to evolve.
The shift to a corporate-sponsored halftime show allowed for bigger productions, a single headliner, and a move away from strictly family-friendly acts to a different kind of spectacle. But despite this shift, television still had its limitations. Jackson made excellent use of the tools available at the time. Today, cameras can do much more—moving across preset lines, integrating CGI, and even incorporating advanced effects like the drones used in Lady Gaga’s performance. The evolution of technology has completely transformed what’s possible.
"The idea of the halftime show as an entertaining spectacle has always been there. However, what entertains a live audience in the stadium differs from what works on national television, and the technology needed to bridge that gap had to evolve."
Jackson’s show, however, took place in an awkward setting under challenging conditions. The Rose Bowl is a flat, open stadium, and because the performance happened during the day, there was no dramatic lighting or spotlighting. The stage had to be assembled in the middle of the field, with just a few cameras capturing the action as best they could.
Still, Jackson maximized what was available. He incorporated what are known as "card tricks," a technique used in previous halftime shows, where audience members hold colored cards and flip them to create large-scale images. His performance also featured an illusion in which a stunt double appeared on different scoreboards before vanishing, only for Jackson to "reappear" on another scoreboard and then finally emerge from the stage. Instead of relying on camera effects like his music videos did, he created spectacle through theatrical elements—fans, dry ice, and filling the field with people—making the most of the technology of his time.
Is the music itself as significant as the spectacle and awe of these larger-than-life performances?
It all comes down to the audience—if they don’t recognize or connect with the music, it may simply not be made for them, and that’s okay. But if a song holds no meaning for the viewer, they’re unlikely to enjoy the performance. A show can be the biggest, flashiest spectacle ever, but if people aren’t singing along, it becomes a problem.
That’s why no artist debuts new music during a halftime show. Beyoncé came close when she released "Formation" the day before performing it, but that was a deliberate choice. Familiarity is crucial—audiences want to hear songs they know, but presented in a fresh, exciting way. So, while the spectacle is important, the music will always matter.
In 2004, Justin Timberlake’s accidental exposure of Janet Jackson’s chest during the Super Bowl halftime show led to major changes in television censorship. How did this incident impact broadcast regulations, and what were its lasting effects on the industry?
It led to the implementation of broadcast delays, typically ranging from five to eight seconds, allowing networks to cut the feed if necessary. Radio has similar delays, usually just a few seconds, to censor profanity or other inappropriate content.
In addition to broadcast delays, artist contracts became more stringent. The NFL and its producers now require advance approval of the performance before it is created. It’s also worth noting a clear shift in headliner selection following the 2004 incident. In the years that followed, the halftime show featured predominantly white male rock artists—except for Prince. It wasn’t until 2012, eight years later, that another female headliner, Madonna, was given the stage.
So, no women for the halftime show for a couple of years?
I don’t know if that was an official rule, but those implicit biases were certainly at play. The transition from one MTV star to another seemed deliberate. The thinking was, "Well, Madonna is 53—what could she possibly do?" But that’s not how it actually played out.
There is real, tangible censorship in place, but implicit bias also plays a significant role in shaping these decisions.
Someone who's experienced similar backlash is Beyoncé during her 2016 performance. How did that change the temperature of the halftime show and the audience watching it?
Historically, she performed with Destiny’s Child in a well-received set. Their songs, a mix of pop and R&B, leaned into the softer hip-hop sounds of the early 2000s. Even if the lyrics carried a sexy or double-entendre element, they were widely accepted because the music felt familiar.
Later, she returned as a guest performer with Coldplay. This was pre-COVID and during the Black Lives Matter movement, but before the George Floyd protests. The day before the Super Bowl, she released the video for "Formation," which explicitly depicted the post-Hurricane Katrina reality. As a Southern artist, Beyoncé felt deeply connected to these themes, using powerful imagery to make an artistic statement.
The video featured scenes of rising floodwaters and police cars, setting the stage for her halftime performance. On the field, she paid homage to Michael Jackson with a military-style bandolier, but also evoked Black Power symbolism through berets, afros, and raised-fist salutes. "Formation" itself didn’t fit neatly into pop or R&B—it incorporated trap, bounce, and rap elements. Even Beyoncé’s singing was mostly limited to the hook, making it less immediately recognizable, even to fans. This unfamiliarity, combined with the song’s political undertones, made parts of the audience uncomfortable, fueling the backlash.
We need your help to stay independent
How has Jay-Z’s partnership between ROC Nation and the NFL, which brought artists like Rihanna, Eminem, and The Weeknd to the halftime show, impacted its evolution—both positively and negatively?
As long as the eyes are on the screen, that’s what matters. It's also important to note that halftime show artists don’t get paid—they’re compensated through exposure and promotion. The NFL’s decision to bring in Jay-Z post-Kaepernick was a deliberate move to highlight Black talent, particularly as a way to bridge the gap with the Black community. Artists like Rihanna would not have performed during the years following Kaepernick's protest, but Jay-Z was able to bring in performers who trusted him. This partnership has been successful in convincing artists who might not have otherwise participated.
That said, the 2020 show with Jennifer Lopez and Shakira generated 1,300 FCC complaints. While their music was aimed at a broad audience, the performance was still seen as too much for some viewers—likely because they are both women and Latina. By bringing such diverse talent to the field, Jay-Z helps to reshape the NFL's image. Financially, it’s clear that more viewers translates into more revenue for the league.
Could his partnership be at stake now that he’s been named alongside Sean “Diddy” Combs in sexual assault lawsuits?
I can understand how that’s a problem. All of this is unfolding in real-time, and it depends on where the values and money align. We always hope the right things are done, but that doesn’t always happen. The real test—if it hasn’t already occurred—will be how convictions and outcomes unfold and whether values and profit align.
This year we have Kendrick Lamar and SZA as our performers. What should we expect to see from these West Coast stars?
Lamar performed with Dr. Dre on stage a few years ago, so we have an idea of what to expect. He’s skilled at creating compelling video concepts, and I imagine he’ll bring those elements, along with his unique aesthetics and ideologies, to the field. The question is whether these will be easily understood by mainstream audiences. We’ll have to wait and see, but I think it will be an interesting show.
Shares