Semiotics in its purest definition is the study of signs, (Daniel Chandler, (2002), Semiotics – the basics). Signs can be words, images, sounds, gestures, and objects that represent deeper meanings, and they are crucial to understanding participatory media culture due to the nature of the way messages are sent in today's digitised sphere. Participatory media culture is defined as the emergence of consumers' increased agency in Web 2.0. Where once whole messages were transmitted, abbreviations, emojis and GIFs have been introduced to simplify this communicative process. Although developed as a shorthand, these signifiers became a vessel for alternative connotations to be communicated in the digitised space, fostering community, and creating a universal computerised language, to allow people from all walks of life to communicate in the online world.
Abbreviations & acronyms
Through a digitised lens, the use of abbreviations as signs holds both specific denotations and connotations. In a baseline sense, the denotations of abbreviations and acronyms are the words they are shortened from, but on a deeper level, different individuals will infer different meanings from the same shorthand. For example, ‘LOL’ is an acronym for the phrase Laugh Out Loud, and though there are presumably many people who still use it in its intended way, TED Talk speaker John McWhorter identifies that, “LOL’ no longer "means" anything. Rather, it "does something" – conveying an attitude”, (John McWhorter, (2013), LOL isn't funny anymore). McWhorter’s analysis of the shift that ‘LOL’ has undertaken from behaviour to an attitude represents the fluidity of semiotics to grow and change from individual to individual and become mailable throughout time, with the ability to adapt to different cultural backgrounds, ages, and educations. This idea represents how semiotics is crucial to understanding participatory media culture because it acts as a universal, digitalised language that connects individuals from all over the globe in the online world. Therefore, due to acronyms and abbreviations having no participant criteria, they are accessible and open to all, mimicking one of the key features of Habermas’s concept of the public sphere, (Moyo, L (2009), Digital democracy: enhancing the public sphere). Ultimately, the use of semiotics through the signs of abbreviations and acronyms helps to enhance the community of participatory media culture in Web 2.0, highlighting Provost Professor of Communication Henry Jenkin’s definition that, “a participatory culture is also one in which members believe their contributions matter, and feel some degree of social connection with one another”, (Jenkins, H (n.d.), Confronting the challenges of participatory culture).
Emojis
Signs can be represented in many different mediums, much beyond just words. Emojis or emoticons are prime examples of visual symbols that represent a great number of things from emotions to objects all the way to the weather. Although emojis have been an important part of online participatory culture since their emergence in 2011, (Oralkan, J (n.d.), A brief history of Emoji), it was the pictogram known as the face with tears of joy (😂) selection as the 2015 Oxford dictionaries ‘Word of the year’ that really gained their prominence in the communication sector. Causing an uproar within the public that the ‘word of the year’ wasn’t even a word, The Oxford Dictionary's response to the criticism noted the crucially important communication functions of emojis, which are increasingly relevant today. “It captures the mood, ethos and preoccupations of the year and reflects the sharp increase in popularity of emoji across the world in 2015”, (Oxford dictionaries, (2015), in Danesi M, The semiotics of emoji). This achievement was a milestone for semiotics in the online world because it was the first notable instance where digital creators could portray what they wanted to say in more than just words or images. The emoji is perhaps one of the most recognisable signifiers within web 2.0, simply due to its definition. The Oxford Learner’s Dictionaries (2022) defines emojis as “a small digital image used to express an idea or emotion in emails, on the internet, or on social media”, ultimately depicting its prominence as a sign whose role lies within the world of participatory media culture. With 92% of the online population using emojis daily, (approximately 4.6 billion) and a further 10 billion emojis sent each day, (The Pipeline, (n.d.), 30 emoji statistics for businesses), the significance emojis hold in the digital world is evident. Even more interestingly, however, like signs, over time the uses and meanings of emojis have shifted from their intended purpose. To convey laughter in the digital space, Millennials (born between 1981 and 1996) have larger collective use of the face with tears of joy emoji (😂), which is quite broadly looked down upon by Generation Z, (born between 1995 and 2012), who primarily choose the skull (💀) or loudly crying (😭) emojis to demonstrate their laughter online, (Yurieff, K (2021), Sorry, millennials. The 😂 emoji isn't cool anymore). As shown in Appendix A, the loudly crying (😭) emoji replaced the tears of joy (😂) emoji as the most used pictogram on Twitter in March of 2022. The tears of joy (😂) emoji have recently regained that title as of May 30th, 2022, shown through a real-time, Twitter emoji-tracking webpage; Emojitracker. The push and pull between these two emojis demonstrates the flexibility of semiotics and further demonstrates how the use of signs is subject to change. Internet linguist and author of "Because Internet: Understanding the New Rules of Language", Gretchen McCulloch identifies that the tears of joy emoji “was a victim of its own success”. “If you indicate digital laughter for years and years in the same way, it starts to feel insincere, (McCulloch, G (n.d.) ‘Because Internet: Understanding the new rules of Language’). This inspection into the trends and patterned nature of semiotics signals why individuals within Generation Z may be looking for new and fresh ways to demonstrate laughter. Author of The Emoji Revolution, Dr Phillip Seargeant likens emojis to digitised slang. “People project cultural values on emojis, and then the way they use them becomes part of the identity they’re displaying,” (Dr Seargeant, P (2019, The Emoji Revolution: How technology is shaping the future of communication). This rich analysis of emojis, the ways that different demographics use them and the cultural identity behind their use, exemplify the utilization of semiotics to explain and understand participatory media culture. Through these emoticons' skewed meanings, individuals can employ them in varied ways and derive different connotations from the same icons, ultimately suggesting the limitless possibilities of meaning-making in the online world, through participatory media culture.
GIFs
Similar to emojis, GIFs are visual signs. GIFs are a collection of still images placed one after the other to mimic a movement. They are usually designed to be humorous and similarly to memes, can be interpreted in a variety of ways, different from the creator’s original intent. GIFs are a great example of semiotics because they are a visual device that represents different aspects of life, from culture and education to online habits. Through their creation is a digital process, GIFs are signifiers that belong in the online world of participatory media culture, but unlike acronyms and emojis, their joke-provoking nature lends to some of the less inviting characteristics of the internet. For a message to be received in its intended manner, the producer of each message relies on its recipients to have set knowledge of its function, (Hodge, R and Kress, G (1988), Social Semiotics). The medium of GIFs is universally known for having humorous qualities, but throughout their development within the space of participatory media culture and the growing crisis of casual racism, people's use of reaction GIFs has created an online epidemic of ‘Digital Blackface’. A progressive public relations team named Mixte’s definition of digital blackface is “blackface that takes the form of reaction GIFs by non-Black digital users who anonymously hide behind and even grow their platforms from under the guise of digital and cultural trends,” (Mixte, (2022), Unlearning Digital Blackface with Culturally-Responsible GIFing). For example, Appendix B shows a tweet by Daily Mail columnist, Meghan McCain, to which she links a reaction GIF of a black woman mouthing the words, ‘so rude and so nasty. The semiotics of GIFs used in this way decentralise the importance of community inside participatory media culture by signifying an imbalance of equality in the online world. This itself attributes to another element of Habermas’s public sphere, ‘unfettered freedom of expression’, (Moyo, L (2009), Digital democracy: enhancing the public sphere). It is immoral and discriminatory to attribute people of colour to certain overdramatised emotions or behaviours through reaction GIFs, therefore there is a necessity for a logonomic system; “a system that prescribes social semiotic behaviours at points of production and reception”, (Hodge, R and Kress, G (1988), Social Semiotics). In this way, it is not possible to have complete ‘unfettered freedom of expression’, which is evident why Habermas’s public sphere is not suited for the digital environment. Semiotically, GIFs have the potential to bring online communities together and celebrate differences in representation among individuals, but as they are visual and mimic real people, creators and sharers must be cautious of what is deemed to be moral and ethical within the online world of participatory media culture.
Semiotics is an overt analysis of the products of the internet and is useful to understand participatory media culture because, in its purest sense, it is what consumers and creators use to communicate online. Within the space of participatory media culture, the way people interpret and utilise abbreviations and acronyms, emojis and GIFs is crucial to maintaining a safe and open online culture. Ultimately, through the analysis of signifiers and connotations produced in the digital world, semiotics is permeant to understanding participatory media culture in today's digitised media landscape.
REFERENCE LIST
1. Chandler, D (2002), ‘Introduction’, in Semiotics – the basics, Routledge, London, pp. 1, accessed 26th May 2022
2. Danesi, M (2016), ‘Preface’, in The Semiotics of Emoji : The Rise of Visual Language in the Age of the Internet, Bloomsbury Publishing Plc, 2016. ProQuest E-book Central, pp. VI, accessed 27th May 2022
3. Dr Seargeant, P (2019) The emoji revolution: how technology is shaping the future of communication, Cambridge University Press, accessed 30th May 2022
4. Hodge, R and Kress, G (1988), ‘Ideological complexes and logonomic systems’ in Social Semiotics, Polity Press, pp. 4-5, accessed 30th May 2022
5. Jenkins, H (n.d.), Confronting the challenges of participatory culture, Macarthur, pp. 3, accessed 26th May 2022
6. McWhorter, J (2013), LOL isn't funny anymore, The Cable News Network (CNN), accessed 26th May 2022
7. McCulloch, G (2019), Because Internet: Understanding the new rules of language, Riverhead Books, accessed 30th May 2022
8. Mixte, (2022), Unlearning Digital Blackface with Culturally-Responsible GIFing, Mixte, accessed 30th May 2022
9. Moyo, L (2009), ‘Digital democracy: enhancing the public sphere’, in G Creeber & R Martin (eds.), Digital cultures: understanding new media, Open University press, Maidenhead, pp. 139-150, accessed 26th May 2022
10. Oralkan, J (n.d.), A brief history of Emoji, Collecteurs, accessed 27th May 2022
11. The Pipeline, (n.d.), 30 emoji statistics for businesses, Zoominfo, accessed 30th May 2022
12. Yurieff, K (2021), Sorry, millennials. The 😂 emoji isn't cool anymore, The Cable News Network Business (CNN Business), accessed 30th May 2022
Appendix A)
Appendix B)
Comments