Will Kendrick Lamar's Super Bowl Halftime Show Performance Be Censored?

As Kendrick Lamar’s highly anticipated performance at the Super Bowl Halftime Show approaches, so does the speculation about his setlist.

Two weeks ago, MSR News Online reported that sources allegedly suggested the NFL asked Lamar not to play the hit, award-winning diss track, Not Like Us.

Fast forward to this week, and the NFL and FOX are reportedly looking at the rapper’s hyped headline set.

TMZ reports that the Wednesday before the Super Bowl is the day the headlining artist hands their setlist over to NFL and FOX executives – in this case, Wednesday, 5 February, ahead of the big day on Sunday, 9 February (the event will air in Australia on Monday, 10 February).

Extra eyes are on Lamar’s setlist thanks to the controversial Song of the Year at the Grammy Awards, Not Like Us, which describes Drake as an alleged “certified paedophile”.

Headline performances at the Super Bowl typically have swear words bleeped by the NFL and FOX, but Not Like Us puts the idea of censoring art in an unusual position. Lawyers working for the NFL and FOX are reportedly poring over Lamar’s setlist, inspecting the lyrics for possible FCC violations and lawsuits.

Last month, Drake sued his and Lamar’s parent record label, Universal Music Group (UMG), for releasing Not Like Us. The former claimed the song contains “inflammatory and shocking allegations.”

In the lawsuit, Drake described the promotion of Not Like Us as an example of the record company valuing “corporate greed over the safety and wellbeing of its artists.” Lamar’s song features lyrics that allege Drake “likes ‘em young” and that he and his peers are “certified paedophiles” who should be “registered and placed on neighbourhood watch.”

Furthermore, Drake alleged that UMG “approved, published and launched” a campaign to create a “viral hit” out of the Lamar track. He added that the campaign was “intended to convey the specific, unmistakable, and false factual allegation that Drake is a criminal paedophile and to suggest that the public should resort to vigilante justice in response.”

In response to Drake's lawsuit, UMG called the case “illogical” and accused him of trying to “weaponise the legal process.”

Denying Drake’s claims, UMG wrote: “Not only are these claims untrue, but the notion that we would seek to harm the reputation of any artist—let alone Drake—is illogical.”

Adding that Drake has engaged in diss tracks with other artists, which UMG promoted, the label said, “Throughout his career, Drake has intentionally and successfully used UMG to distribute his music and poetry to engage in conventionally outrageous back-and-forth ‘rap battles’ to express his feelings about other artists.

“He now seeks to weaponise the legal process to silence an artist’s creative expression and to seek damages from UMG for distributing that artist’s music.”