In the case which opposes him to Elon Musk, Twitter has provided proof of the denigration of the billionaire, by showing the poo emoji addressed to its CEO. But Elon Musk didn’t mean that emoji in a vulgar way.
Live from the most unintelligent timeline the multiverses could deliver, July 13, 2022 offers us an astonishing rebound in the “poop emoji” affair. Background: In May 2022, following a text explanation from the Twitter boss about the calculation of fake accounts and bots, Elon Musk released an unstoppable response. A poo emoji (with eyes and a smile). This response was surprising to say the least, coming from someone who then wanted to buy Twitter.
Fast forward to July 2022: Elon Musk no longer wants to buy Twitter and the social network is taking the billionaire to court in order to force the sale. The file compiled by Twitter’s lawyers contains the famous “poo emoji” tweet, which immediately sets the tone for the proceedings that will follow. Elon Musk’s answer is filed in the chapter of evidence that tries to show that the billionaire has ” denigrated the company publicly, even as he attempted to buy it out. An attack supposed to prove his unwillingness to ensure that the deal happens.
The poo emoji is not what it seems
But that was without counting on Elon Musk, who, failing to still want to buy Twitter, knows how to use the social network. In a short tweet, he brings an element which, we hope, will shed light on the magistrates’ investigation. “💩=bs”, he asserts, laconic. In English, “bs” is short for ” bullshit », a vulgar interjection that could nobly be translated as « bullshit “. Semantically, Musk therefore hijacks the meaning of his emoji: it is not an insult or denigration, but a roundabout way of saying that what the Twitter boss says is false and untrustworthy.
According to Emojipedia, bible of emojis, the one officially called ” pile of poo (pile of poo), was designed to refer to feces, toilet topics, and all derived slang terms. the bullshit English could, at the limit, enter into this definition: the judges will know how to decide.
This isn’t the first time an emoji has made its way into a lawsuit. An Israeli court had to interpret in 2017 the meaning of a smiling emoji in a sex case. The non-absolute character of emojis, which are part of normal speech on the web and in instant messaging, makes it difficult, if not impossible, to objectively interpret a written word. The sensitivity and intent of the issuer will remain key determinants of meaning.
In the case between Twitter and Elon Musk, it’s a safe bet, on the other hand, that the poo emoji will not be the most important element available to the judges.