This is a delightful quick read of the emoji's history.
One of the most fascinating aspects is that emoji's success is heavily dependent on the Unicode Consortium, which holds absolute authority on emoji and serves more or less as a benevolent dictator. Well, technically, it is an oligarchy. The decisions are made by a handful of unelected people (most of them paid their way in) after debate, negotiation, compromise, and balance of the ever swinging public opinion.
Without a doubt, had emoji not been controlled by the Consortium or had the idea of full customization been adopted, emoji would probably have turned into a cesspool -- it is simply impossible to make everybody happen everywhere all the time. Someone has to put the foot down; someone has to be the adult in the room, setting the rules and standards so that the rest of us can actually have some fun, if not too much fun. That someone is the Consortium, the oligarchy.
So thus I wonder, is it human nature that we can only enjoy good things if an iron fist decides what is permissible and what is not? Is this why religion exists, so that we can have an omnipotent being or karma ruling us over? Is this why authoritarianism is such a magnet that whenever a person has a lapse in judgement, they get sucked into the fantasy of being told what to do? The history of emoji itself might be a lighthearted journey of how those endearing symbols come into being, but deeply, I think, it paints a vivid picture of one aspect of human nature.