:) or :-)? Some Highly Scientific Data

The end of an era: Just 18 percent of survey respondents report using the full-faced emoticon.
eBay Deals

The emoticon was invented, in its current form, as a means of moderating an intensely nerdy discussion. A nerdy discussion about—not to be redundant, but—physics. It was 1982. A group of researchers at Carnegie Mellon were chatting on an online message board; they began discussing what might happen if the cable on their building's elevator were cut, sending the elevator into free fall. What if the falling elevator had a candle in it? Or a pigeon? Or a drop of mercury? And then their chat, as chats are wont to do, drove itself to an absurdly logical conclusion. "WARNING!" someone wrote. Because of a recent physics experiment, the leftmost elevator has been contaminated with mercury.

This was, of course, a joke—if one of the heh rather than the haha variety. But the scientists realized that, out of context, someone might interpret all the hilarity as an actual emergency. They needed a symbol, they decided, to signal the fact that the only contamination taking place was of their minds, courtesy of all their hypothetical humorSomeone proposed an asterisk to do that work. Someone else suggested an ampersand (“&” resembling, the logic went, “a jolly fat man in convulsions of laughter”). And then Scott Fahlman chimed in with the compound punctuation mark that would live on in chat windows and inboxes across the Internet:

I propose that the following character sequence for joke markers, he wrote.

His next line?

“ :-) ”

“We were just nerds, goofing around,” Fahlman, now a research professor at Carnegie Mellon, recently told me of his sideways entrance into the lexicon of the LOL. “This was not meant to be a serious invention.”

It's a good thing he feels that way. Because, according to a survey conducted by eBay Deals, very few people, anymore, seem to be using the smiley as Fahlman first proposed it. We still use emoticons, to be sure. We use, even more often, emoji that offer a comically broad range of facial expressions. We have, at this point, thoroughly disrupted the smiley

But, in that, we have also moved beyond that original smiley, abandoning it for facial renderings that are more nuanced, more wacky ... more, yes, meaningful. More and more of our programs automatically render the faces we type out as images. More and more of our programs are—to be heh and also haha—emoji-normative.

And even when we return to text-based emoticons, we seem to value efficiency above all. According to eBay's survey of 1,000 Internet users, more than half—58.89 percent—now rely on the hyphen-less (or, if you prefer, the noseless, or Voldemortesque) form:  :) 

A small percentage of participants have also gotten more inventive, it seems, with their smiley-face emoticons. More than 8 percent reported using the long-eyes variation of the noseless smiley:  =)

And more than 7 percent reported taking a cheekier approach to smiling:  ^_^

And more than 2 percent took the sterner approach:  :]

As for Carnegie Mellon's ur-emoticon? Today, it's only a relatively paltry 17.96 percent of people who use the full-face version that Fahlman proposed those thirty-plus years ago. 

Which is sort of  :-(. And also a little bit :-/But also, if you belong to the "language evolves" school of Internet discourse, sort of  ¯\_()_/¯. And possibly even, yes, :-)

Presented by

Megan Garber is a staff writer at The Atlantic.

Why Is Google Making Human Skin?

Hidden away on Google’s campus, doctors at a world-class life sciences lab are trying to change the way people think about their health.

Join the Discussion

After you comment, click Post. If you’re not already logged in you will be asked to log in or register with Disqus.

Please note that The Atlantic's account system is separate from our commenting system. To log in or register with The Atlantic, use the Sign In button at the top of every page.

blog comments powered by Disqus


Why Is Google Making Skin?

Hidden away on Google’s campus, doctors are changing the way people think about health.


How to Build a Tornado

A Canadian inventor believes his tornado machine could solve the world's energy crisis.


A New York City Minute, Frozen in Time

This short film takes you on a whirling tour of the Big Apple


What Happened to the Milky Way?

Light pollution has taken away our ability to see the stars. Can we save the night sky?


The Pentagon's $1.5 Trillion Mistake

The F-35 fighter jet was supposed to do everything. Instead, it can barely do anything.

More in Technology

Just In