Xokas waited to speak with Burger King before responding
El Xokas has now given his account of the end of the Grand King campaign. In a YouTube video, he says he avoided reacting immediately because the contract still had to be discussed with Burger King. He now considers the matter closed, says he received the agreed payment and describes the conversation with the company as amicable.
His summary was blunt: the issue was resolved without losing money, he was paid in full and even ended up with a McDonald's meal created in his name. That is his account; Burger King has not published the financial terms.
The response adds a new layer to the story. This is no longer only about a brand removing a creator after a controversy, but about a streamer using the episode to reinforce his persona: he will not soften himself to make companies more comfortable.
The remark that turned a campaign into a crisis
The row began during a livestream. After a viewer mocked him, Xokas fired back with insults and boasted that Burger King had paid him more than the viewer's parents would earn in twenty years. The clip escaped his community, prompted boycott calls and pulled the chain into the argument.
Burger King removed his menu and said the remarks did not represent its values. Another recent row involving comments about actress Ester Expósito also formed part of the context, although the company did not specify which statement triggered the split.
The streamer's reply was classist, unnecessary and easy to criticise. That does not erase the other question: what exactly did Burger King expect when it hired one of Spain's most temperamental and controversial creators?
“I am not going to change to make people like me”
The most interesting part of the video is not the money but what he says comes next. Xokas intends to keep speaking in the same way even if it closes commercial doors. He treats the affair not as a warning to moderate himself but as the price of maintaining a persona that has worked for years.
That stance plays well with an audience that does not want him to become a corporate spokesman. It also carries an obvious cost: every major campaign is exposed to his next impulsive response. Xokas can accept that because one sponsor does not control his income; a company usually leaves when the conversation stops selling and starts demanding explanations.
Authenticity does not make every comment a good idea. It is possible to reject a corporate script while admitting that attacking a viewer's family and income was a dreadful response. Xokas defends the first point without spending much time on the second.
Burger King knew who it was hiring
Grand King launched on June 24 with menus from Marta Díaz, Marina Rivers, Peldanyos and El Xokas. After he was removed, the campaign continued with the other three creators. A national promotion of this size passes through agencies, communications teams, contracts and risk reviews. Nobody discovered halfway through that Xokas was unpredictable.
That was one reason to hire him. He has an enormous community, turns almost any subject into a conversation and produces clips conventional advertising cannot buy. His personality was part of the product. The problem began when that same personality directed the attention at the brand.
Burger King had every right to end the partnership. What rang hollow was wrapping a reasonable business decision in moral surprise. It wanted Xokas's reach without the risk that has always accompanied it.
Both sides leave with the story that suits them
Burger King can say it acted when the creator's remarks conflicted with its values. Xokas can say he was paid, spoke with the company and refused to bend. The campaign continues without him while his response circulates as more proof that nobody tells him how to behave.
That is not a clean victory for either side. The brand looks like a company that hired a known controversy and stepped away when it was hit by it. Xokas keeps his persona, but once again shows why some companies will think twice before signing him.
Perhaps that is the real agreement between creators and brands: both use each other while the attention outweighs the risk. When it no longer does, each publishes a version and moves on. This time Xokas says he left with the money. The next company knows even more clearly what it would be buying.
The conversation starts here
Sign in with a supporter account to comment. Sign in
Nobody has commented yet. Want to go first?