by Charles Miller

A recent Twitter (or X) post on an apparently-official European Union account featured a colorful graphic reading "An emoji isn't always just an emoji." Most people probably know what an emoji is. An emoji is a pictogram, logogram, ideogram, or smiley face that can be embedded in text messages, emails, web pages, etc. The primary function of emojis is to suggest emotional cues otherwise missing from typed messages. Increasingly, emojis even replace words as part of a logographic system. I will circle back to the EU in due course.

What different people interpret emojis to mean has already become an issue for unfamiliar individuals, law enforcement and even the courts to contend with. A couple was sued for violation of contract after they sent a text including a string of emojis: a champagne bottle, a squirrel, and a comet, then backed out of the deal. Apparently, the plaintiff considered that the champagne bottle and comet cemented the deal… but it sounds squirrelly to me. California prosecutors tried to prove that a man arrested during a prostitution sting was guilty because his test messages included emojis depicting a lady's high heel shoe and bag of money. The man claimed he was only being flirtatious. Who knows? You cannot exactly look up the definition of an emoji in a dictionary.

Or maybe some people think you can. In 2015, the Oxford Dictionaries named the emoji depicting a smiley face with tears of joy as their "Word of the Year." Excuse me? That "Word of the Year" is not even a word and certainly has no legal or even widely accepted definition; and that can be a big problem.

And now enters the European Union, the unelected bureaucracy of which is once again expanding the scope of its Orwellian internet censorship regime, this time focusing on emojis. A report from the EU identifies systemic problems including the spread of illegal activities occurring online, and hints at the mitigation measures that might be mandated under the existing Digital Services Act (DSA). Among the possible mitigation measures are the use of automated systems and Artificial Intelligence (AI) to detect emojis used as code for illegal activities; such as marijuana leaves or pills to imply the sale of illegal drugs. A problem I see here is the question of who is going to decide which emojis mean what. Will it be the AI algorithm that has never smoked a joint or popped an upper, or the unelected bureaucrat in Brussels possibly doing both while on the job. Either is dystopian.

More serious than the preceding mockery, the fact is that identifying "coded language" would require AI or the bureaucrats to interpret context and intent subjectively. Since it came into effect in February 2024, the EU's DSA has encouraged internet content providers worldwide to become proactive in moderating content in order not to be banned from the huge EU market. Therein lies the reason we in North America ought to be concerned about what censorship the EU proposes to impose. A technical challenge is that emojis are inherently ambiguous and context-dependent, making accurate interpretation uncertain. The danger here is that censors for web sites will always and reflexively err on the side of maximum censorship just to avoid running afoul of regulations, in the EU or elsewhere.

A perfect example of what emoji to ban or not ban is this. In some Middle Eastern cultures, the thumbs-up gesture is considered quite offensive. Unlike in most of the western world where thumbs-up signifies approval or success, that same gesture (or its emoji) might be interpreted as rude or insulting, similar to the middle finger in our culture. Attempting to assign definitions to emojis, especially for purposes of censorship, is a slippery slope everyone needs to avoid.

**************

Charles Miller is a freelance computer consultant with decades of IT experience and a Texan with a lifetime love for Mexico. The opinions expressed are his own. He may be contacted at 415-101-8528 or email FAQ8 (at) SMAguru.com.

Discover Lokkal: Mission

Contact / Contactar