Scott Van Pelt's New Year's Coverage Sparks Debate After Shocked Reaction to Men Kissing

It's very human to have a visceral reaction to something before you've had a chance to think about it and form your response mindfully. What you react to and how you display that reaction can say a lot about who you are as a person.

ESPN anchor Scott Van Pelt ran afoul of this rule on New Year's Eve.

The anchor was celebrating shortly after the ball dropped to celebrate the advent to a new year when he saw something he did not expect pop up on the screen behind him. His reaction has sparked a rousing debate online about homophobia and what kind of standard media personalities should be held to.

There are a few silly traditions Americans agree on when it comes to New Year's. You shouldn't wash your body, home, or laundry on New Year's Day, you should eat a large number of grapes or black-eyed peas, and you should stay up to midnight to kiss your favorite people or pets.

And when it comes to New Year's Eve, many Americans tune in to watch the ball drop in New York City.

It's traditional that after the ball drops, the cameras in Times Square cut to attendees all across the area, most of whom are sharing jubilant kisses as the confetti falls and "New York, New York" by Frank Sinatra croons from all available speakers.

On ESPN, Scott Van Pelt was ringing in the network's New Year's celebrations as footage from the NYC ball drop played on a screen behind him.

The "kiss cam" hopped from smooching couple to smooching couple before briefly alighting on a gay couple sharing a sweet kiss. Van Pelt caught sight of the couple, threw his hands up, and said, "Ohhhh," in a disgusted-sounding voice. He said, "What do we, what do we got?" Before he seemed to catch himself and added, "Love in the air."

But an impression of his first, seemingly disgusted, reaction remained an echo on the internet.

Across social media, people debated Van Pelt's reaction.

Many people saw it as harmless, with some TikTokers calling it a "reaction that he quickly got under control." Others saw it as a chance to decry homosexuality, whining about "the 7 percent getting 100 percent of the representation."

But others were disturbed that a popular media personality would have a reaction deemed homophobic, whether he recovered from it or not.

On Threads, one user wrote, "I don't care if he caught himself, that was homophobia, and it's gross."

The debate has raged on about whether media personalities should be held to different standards from the rest of the world, and whether Van Pelt should issue an apology.

But there's one thing everyone seems to agree on: it only took him a few seconds to realize he was steering down the wrong path for his career and to course correct, whether his correction was genuine or not. And of course, whether that's enough or not depends on who you ask.