Companies Want To Insert Ads Into Unicode (thenextweb.com)

AmiMoJo writes: Food company Nestle has started a petition to get a KitKat emoji into the Unicode standard. They aren't alone, Taco Bell wants a taco emoji added, and Durex suggested adding a condom. While the latter two are at least generic, KitKat is a trademark of Nestle and the "break" image a key part of their marketing. Next year Unicode will include a faceplam emoji (U+1F926) for occasions such as this.

Comments

So?

[Anonymous Coward]

I don't see a problem with having yet another useless character that few people will ever use. However, the use of a grassroots petitioning service like change.org to advance a corporate agenda is much more troubling and a very cynical move by (well-known evildoers) Nestle.

Re:Why emojis/emoticons are in Unicode?

[TWX]

Because the newest generation likes to express themselves differently than the dinosaurs...

Believe me the demand is there, just because you can't comprehend it doesn't mean it shouldn't exist.

I'm sure that lots of people disagree with me, but historically the most creative writing emerged when base words and concepts were generally not acceptable in speech. Sure, it's censorship, but on the other hand, you don't find Shakespeare to simply be dialogue loaded-down with vulgar words either, and when vulgarities are employed, sparingly, they are highly effective.

Emojis are a form of base communications, when one does not take the time to express one's self properly. That doesn't mean that there isn't a place for them, but it isn't unfair to judge people by their choice to use them instead of the express themselves otherwise.