- Justin Baldoni is suing the New York Times over its story about Blake Lively’s complaint against him.
- He claims the newspaper took his publicists’ quotes out of context and removed an emoji.
- Experts say emojis can change the meaning of a statement, and Baldoni may have a point.
As the legal battle between Blake Lively and Justin Baldoni heats up, one of the most contested points may involve an emoji.
In his lawsuit against the New York Times, Baldoni said the newspaper failed to include an upside-down smiley emoji — which is used to convey sarcasm or silliness — in a quote, effectively changing the meaning.
The Times quoted Jennifer Abel, one of his publicists, as telling Melissa Nathan, a crisis management expert: “Wow. Read at face value, it looks like Abel is congratulating Nathan for contributing to a critical Daily Mail story to Lively.
However, Baldoni said the upside-down emoji at the end indicated that Abel was being sarcastic and therefore changed the meaning of the text.
It raises an interesting question about modern communication, Dr. Monica Riordan, a professor of computer-mediated communication at Chatham University, told Business Insider.
“I would argue that the inclusion of that emoji is actually very important,” Riordan said. “You can’t just remove an emoji from a message and show that the message contains the same meaning.”
Others disagree, arguing that releasing emojis won’t be enough to help Baldoni’s case.
Emojis make up for the lack of body language
Emojis originated in Japan in the late 90s as a set of pixelated images created for an early mobile internet platform. By 2011, Apple introduced an emoji keyboard on the iPhone and has regularly replenished it with new ones.
As communication has become more dependent on digital media, from texting close friends to texting on online dates, emojis have become crucial to filling in the gaps for what we don’t see.
“Emojis have similar functions to body language and spoken interaction in the digital space,” Vyvyan Evans, a linguist and author of The Emoji Code, told BI. As with body language IRL, he said emojis are often used to set the tone.
Evans compared the upside-down smiley emoji to an eye roll or shrug in real life. Because tone of voice and facial expressions can drastically change the meaning of a phrase, so can emojis.
“If an emoji is removed, it’s not just affecting the tone, it’s changing the meaning in a fundamental way,” he said.
Emojis are more complicated than tone of voice
Unlike a smile or a frown, which have more universally accepted meanings, emojis are more up to interpretation, Riordan said. The way people use emojis can vary by generation, for example.
It becomes even more acute when analyzing a relationship between two people who may have a common language. It’s common to develop certain norms around emoji use that maybe people outside of that relationship might not understand or might misinterpret,” she said.
Not everyone uses the upside-down emoji in the same way — some mean it’s ironic, others to show disappointment or painful acceptance.
This makes parsing emojis in texts even more challenging. Riordan said there are “dangers” in going through so many layers of communication to analyze a person’s intent. It gets even more confusing when the emoji is cut off from a quote.
It probably won’t be enough to help Baldon’s case
Sean Andrade, a Los Angeles attorney who represents plaintiffs in defamation cases, previously told BI that removing context such as emoji from the Times would be “a little unethical.” However, he believes it won’t be enough to disprove the fact that Baldoni’s team engaged in a smear campaign against Lively.
Riordan said Baldoni could argue that the emoji changed the meaning of the message, but would likely “have a hard time proving intent.” Not everyone sees emojis as necessary to be quoted.
However the case comes out, Evans said it brings up an important point for journalists: It can be “very dangerous” ethically and legally not to release emojis that could dramatically change the interpretation of a quote.
“Communicative intent is what’s important,” he said. “Without the other relevant elements, you’re changing it and misreporting,” whether a reporter means it or not.
