[ad_1]
At least 230 new emoji, when different skin tones and genres are included, are expected to come out this year. As of 2018, only 157 emoji code emoticons have been added to the Unicode standard – the code used to support emoji on different platforms.
In addition to laziness, a skunk, a banjo, a yo-yo and waffles, this last set represents another step towards more diverse and more inclusive characters. Since 2015, when new skin nuances have been incorporated into Unicode, emoji have become more representative of their users. And now, 17 of the new emoji will represent people with disabilities, as well as objects badociated with a disability, such as canes, wheelchairs and mechanical arms.
Faces and neutral numbers are also included in this new version of Unicode (although disability-related emoticons are only available in men's and women's versions). And users will be able to fully configure emoji "people who hold hands" with skin tone and gender options, allowing couples of different ethnic backgrounds of the same bad, gender or age. Have one or both partners who identify as non-binary configure an emoji that is more representative of them.
It is estimated that 92% of the online population of the world uses these characters. Besides these grateful emoticons and, hopefully, empowering people through greater ability to self-represent, the inclusion of more diverse emoticons is important in terms of communication. These new emoji can be used as a resource when discussing topics with which they are badociated. The same can be said for any emoji, but how much of the emoji is useful or effective? I do not remember the last time I had a conversation with a text about dinosaurs, and certainly not a conversation that forced me to distinguish a T-Rex from a dinosaur. a Diplodocus. And even if these conversations were held regularly, how important are they to society? Our communication resources should surely reflect what is important to us, even before we start thinking about long-extinct creatures. And yet, these animals were deemed important enough to be represented in emoji.
So, does this apparent change in the Unicode approach indicate that he is beginning to become aware of how emoji are used as a communication tool, as well as social and cultural implications? what they chose to include? Is it possible that the time has pbaded when groups that felt forgotten by the emoji had to present petitions to plead their case?
But there is a twist here. The accessibility emoji have been proposed by the international giant of technology Apple. First, it raises the question of whether Unicode is really listening to emoji users and what they want. Or if the voices of powerful technology companies that have a seat at the Unicode table are prioritized.
Some might wonder why anyone would see a problem there. Apple has done a good job of campaigning on behalf of an under-represented social group. And you can say that it does not matter who pushes for change to happen, as long as that change happens. However, representation is a sensitive topic and, in trying to effectively represent a group of people and diversity within this group, a very fine line is crossed.
For example, many would argue that the inclusion of the "deaf person / man / woman" emoji is wonderful. But the meaning of this emoji is communicated by the signing of the word "deaf" in American sign language. It is currently believed that there are up to 300 languages of different signs in the world. I wonder how far Apple has engaged the deaf and hard of hearing community in designing this emoji? And, if so, to what extent was this sample biased in the United States? I am interested to see how deaf and hard of hearing communities that do not use American sign language will react to this emoji.
In fact, the discussions that are already beginning to emerge around these new emoji are reminiscent of those that took place in 2015, when the flesh tone options were published. It has been argued that the tone of the skin is not synonymous with ethnicity. What about the shapes of the eyes, ears, lips, nose and hair type? What is the degree of representativeness of the "standard" face of emoji with a fleshy tone?
Similarly, to what extent is an emoji of an American sign language user representative of the entire deaf and hard of hearing community? In addition, are people with disabilities who use emoji now forced to represent themselves in this way? And finally, will there be cases of using these emoji in an unintentionally offensive way? However, it should be noted that recent research suggests that the various current emoji are used positively.
Explore further:
Get ready for lama and bagel emojis: Apple adds 70 new icons in iOS 12.1 update
Source link