There was much ado recently about the meaning of Julie Bishop's red angry face Vladimir Putin emoji.
Subscribe now for unlimited access.
$0/
(min cost $0)
or signup to continue reading
This, of course, was just a political confection on Labor's part (since when did red angry faces mean anything cheerful or good?).
But one of the other emoji answers Bishop gave in that infamous February interview was ambiguous enough to warrant the full force of a Senate committee investigation.
When asked by Buzzfeed if she supported marriage equality, Bishop replied with two hands, palms out.
According to emojipedia this "represents openness" (i.e. I haven't decided) or hugs or jazz hands.
So Bishop cutely evaded the question, as she had done many other times while the same-sex marriage debate raged this year.
It has long been been assumed that logically - as a nominal Liberal moderate - Bishop was a same-sex marriage backer, but she had a habit of declining to make her position public.
Indeed, in one of the only occasions she declared a position (back in 2010), she said her personal position - as well as the Coalition's - was that the Marriage Act didn't need changing.
Even in August's butt-numbing Coalition party room meeting, where senior colleagues like Christopher Pyne, Greg Hunt and Marise Payne backed same-sex marriage and George Brandis backed a conscience vote, Bishop only spoke in favour of a "people's vote" on the matter.
She also cautioned there was a huge divergence of views in her Perth electorate of Curtin.
So it was something of a momentous moment on Monday night when Bishop appeared on The Project and indicated her support for the reform.
"I think the Australian people should have their say. I have absolutely no concerns about it myself, but I know there a lot of people who are deeply concerned about the issue," she said with a shrug.
As in, what's the big deal, kids? Surely you knew this all along?
It's understood that there was nothing particularly premeditated about Bishop's response. It was simply the answer she gave when the question came up.
But the timing is oh so interesting.
Bishop as deputy under Abbott was scrupulous about not saying anything that could be contrasted against her conservatively-minded leader. If she had come out for same-sex marriage when the debate was at its hottest a few months ago, there would have been fireworks - both in the party and in the media.
As well as leadership speculations and implications.
Now, under the cover of a new leader who is ferociously supportive of same-sex marriage, the politics are completely different. And so, it's a lot a safer for Bishop to declare her support (albeit in a round about fashion).
It's for this reason that there is some scepticism among Liberal MPs about her comments.
As it was noted when Julia Gillard recently declared her support for the reform, how brave is it for Bishop to come out for same-sex marriage way after the Coalition thrashed out the issue in August and the government now has a set policy on leaving it to voters to decide?
How brave is it with Turnbull firmly established in the PM's office - and no chance Bishop herself might take the top job soon and require the conservative wing of the partyroom to get her there?
There is also some consternation that Bishop's comments will spark another round of distracting internal debate on the issue, just when the government is trying to keep the focus squarely on things like the economy.
It is noted that the current talking points for MPs on same-sex marriage are "very short". A sign that it's not an area where the Prime Minister's team want a lot of discussion right now.
Marriage equality activists are celebrating Bishop's comments, describing them as a sign that "the momentum for reform is unstoppable".
Others within the Coalition, however, see them as a sign of Bishop's political maneuvering. It's not the first time Bishop - as deputy to four successive leaders - has been criticised for not voicing opinions of her own.
As one MP said on Tuesday, "she does go with the flow".
