Johnny Depp and Amber Heard: How Language and Societal

International Journal of Research and Review

Volume 11; Issue: 2; February 2024

Website: www.ijrrjournal.com

Case Study E-ISSN: 2349-9788; P-ISSN: 2454-2237

International Journal of Research and Review (ijrrjournal.com) 133

Volume 11; Issue: 2; February 2024

Johnny Depp and Amber Heard: How Language

and Societal Influences Shape Power and Discourses

Markel Marishta

, Penelope Louka

2,3,4

, Georgios Pilafas

4,5

Student, University of Derby (UK) at Mediterranean College campus, Athens, Greece

Deputy Head of Academic Affairs (Learning, Teaching & Assessment), Mediterranean College, Greece

Head of School of Psychology, Mediterranean College, Greece

Accredited Lecturer, University of Derby (UK) at Mediterranean College campus, Athens, Greece

Programme Leader ‘BSc (Hons) Applied Psychology’, University of Derby (UK) at Mediterranean College

campus, Athens, Greece

Corresponding Author: Markel Marishta

DOI: https://doi.org/10.52403/ijrr.20240216

ABSTRACT

The current paper aims to analyze the case of Johnny Depp and Amber Heard’s claims of domestic

abuse, in the context of Foucault’s concepts of a socially constructed society, power, subject positions

and discourses. Foucauldian Discourse Analysis goes against the westernized concept of structures such

as gender, sexuality morality and norm, as it disregards the notion that these concepts are immutable

and mainly biological, and suggests that society is fluid, placing the wider sociocultural and historical

context of a society as the basic foundations of creating discourses, placing individual concepts and

groups in hierarchies, with knowledge and power granting access to higher places in the societal

hierarchy and therefore facilitating the production of discourses. In light of that, the introduction

includes three qualitative studies that depict the fluidity of gender concepts regarding domestic abuse,

and analyzing in the analysis section the power dynamics, subject positions and discourses created

regarding the two actors, based on theoretical background around FDA analysis and social

constructionism, qualitative studies, as well as recordings of the live trial in 2022 and two articles out

of the four that were chosen, analyzing themes of gender differences, court environment and the media.

The use of 6 analytic tools were used in order to identify the discourses, as well as explain the social

constructionist perspective around gender and language.

Keywords: Johnny Depp, Amber Heard, FDA, Gender, Discourse, Social constructionism

INTRODUCTION

The Johnny Depp and Amber Heard case has been a widely observed and discussed topic both

in the media and across popular culture. This case involves two high-profiled actors, in which

there exists a complex power dynamic, involving allegations of domestic violence from both

of the parties, which includes claims of both physical and psychological abuse. The former

couple, which has been divorced since 2017, attended their first trial over the abuse claims in

2020 in UK, in which Johnny Depp initiated a defamation lawsuit against Amber Heard,

claiming that she falsely accused the actor for domestic abuse, and more specifically, the actor

was against a major UK news outlet “THE SUN”, in which the author of THE SUN described

the actor as a “WIFE BEATER” and described how Johnny Depp was abusive towards his ex-

wife, when the charges against him at that time were only speculative (Christodoulou &

Pollard, 2021).

The actor lost his case against the UK news outlet “THE SUN”, and from then Johnny Depp

continued to go against his ex-wife, Amber, to whom another defamation lawsuit was

performed in early 2022, which involved both actors, in a high-profile case, claiming the

Markel Marishta et.al. Johnny Depp and amber heard: how language and societal influences shape power and

discourses

International Journal of Research and Review (ijrrjournal.com) 134

Volume 11; Issue: 2; February 2024

domestic abuse claims over one another. The trial had a duration of roughly 3 months, starting

from April 11

and ending on the first of June, in which between these three months, both

Johnny Depp and Amber Heard, not only described their personal experiences regarding the

pre-existing abusive allegations, but also moved against one another in an effort to both

discredit the other party, and accuse them of being the aggressor, whilst they themselves were

the victims. While the resulting verdict pointed towards Johnny Depp, the aim of this study

focuses on the multiple discourses that took place both during the trial, and outside of it, while

also observing and analyzing the shifts of power that was present regarding both actors, in

different ways.

The present report is based on Michel Foucault’s theoretical basis of Discourse analysis, which

will be used in the report’s analysis chapter, and also the foundations of the analysis are also

based on a social constructionism point of view, which will be discussed below.

To begin with, qualitative research aims to analyze how individuals understand, experience

and interpret the world around them, through a meaning-making process and not by analyzing

pre-existing and fixed social realities, thus not aiming to generalize results into the mean

population, but differentiate and gain data or results based on individuals’ unique experiences

(Bhatasara et al., 2013; Erslingsson & Brysiewicz, 2013). Considering that people are social

beings, they experience themselves through the mediation of symbolisms, culture and

language, forming a complexity of human experiences, thus making qualitative analysis a great

tool of interpreting these experiences through data analysis (Nowell et al., 2017).

Social constructionism, which can be directly connected with the ideology behind qualitative

analysis, originates from sociology and argues the nature of knowledge and truths as being

socially created and not discovered by the individual’s mind, rather it corresponds with a

collective society’s cultural and historical influences, that makes concepts such as gender, class

and sexuality more fluid than what was firstly believed to be strongly only biological and

immutable (Young & Colin, 2004). Additionally, social constructionism is directly embedded

with critical psychology, as it goes against the mainstream psychology ideology of objective

truths, marking it as a westernized concept, where biological and developmental processes in

regard to gender and society are not the key factors that predict or directly influence

behavior/knowledge (Burr & Dick, 2017).

Structuralism is a term that heavily influenced the sociologist and philosopher Michel Foucault,

in its’ views on how language and culture, operate within a society’s rules and structures around

laws, principles and individual’s behaviors (Khan & MacEachen, 2021). Additionally,

structuralism assesses how language and culture have a relative relation and operate as the

terms subject and object, specifically suggesting that there exists a center, in which it operates

and sustains a whole structure (Khan & MacEachen, 2021). Regarding these claims, every

system such as language, culture, sexuality and gender operate under a structure that consists

of laws, rules and determining factors that conform systems such as gender and sexuality

(Khan, 2018 (as mentioned in Khan & MacEachen, 2021)).

Post-structuralism, contrasts from the initial views of structuralism and focuses in the

interaction between the stimuli and the receiver (Khan & MacEachen, 2021). It uses a

symbolism regarding a reader and a text, in which the text is not passive, but active in the

process and production of meaning, and suggests that a text, which can be replaced with the

term language, is able to create different interpretations to different readers, depending on each

individual’s unique life experiences (Han, 2013). This suggests the notion that objective reality

or objective truth does not exist, rather it depends on the “reader’s” perception of the world,

creating accepted truths, or as Foucault reframed it as discourses (Khan & MacEachen, 2021).

Discourses, as Foucault later developed, was referring to “unwritten” rules, regulations cultural

and structural (as mentioned before) values, that produce and maintain certain behaviors or

subjective truths, which referring to the work of Foucault mainly involved gender norms and

Markel Marishta et.al. Johnny Depp and amber heard: how language and societal influences shape power and

discourses

International Journal of Research and Review (ijrrjournal.com) 135

Volume 11; Issue: 2; February 2024

sexuality, whereas it can also incorporate individualized statements as a whole in order to create

groups within a societal context, such as heterosexuality, homosexuality, disability etc.

(Foucault, 1972, as mentioned in Khan & MacEachen, 2021). Thus, a discourse is an accepted

truth, that is created by sociopolitical influences, and exists within a specific place and time,

hinting that such structures are fluid, and dependent on the context of time, place and culture.

Foucault focused a lot on power and knowledge as well, with the tool of language, that can

create or alter power in regard to either discourses, or subject positions (Foucault, 1981).

Foucault believed that knowledge is shaped by power, and that in every society, there exists a

hierarchy in which different individuals, or subject positions, had “access” to more power

domes (Foucault, 1981). Power can refer to a number of things, it can refer to either a teacher

in contrast to its’ students, therefore revealing the subject position’s power over others, within

the social context that is a school, or it can refer to a greater and more complex form of power

such gender, and how discourses that revolve around the genders, can affect the power that

they obtain. For instance, through historical data, the interaction and difference of the female

gender and male gender as to their role in a society can be easily observed. Before the feminism

movement took place, the female role was dependent more on biological and developmental

discourses, meaning that due to the female gender’s disadvantage in areas such as physical

strength, and the prehistoric data that men were the hunters and women were the nurturers, it

was accepted within that time’s context that a woman should stay home and take care of the

family, whereas the man should work and provide for the woman, and also from the

developmental discourse, that men are more aggressive and violent whereas women are more

kind and caring (Hollway, 1984). These concepts of society and structures were the building

blocks for Foucault’s discourse analysis.

In Johnny Depp’s and Amber Heard’s case, considering the previous theoretical background,

many major discourses can take place, especially referring to the domestic abuse accusations.

While the Analysis chapter of this essay will cover and analyze the framework of the former

couple’s relationship and court behavior, it is important to refer to some current ideological

tendencies that societies have constructed regarding gender differences and their views on

violence. Qualitative research which analyzed gender norms and intimate partner relationships

amongst 33 Columbian women, revealed that more often than not, the couples often held

patriarchal norms, which can describe a connection between domestic violence against women

and patriarchy, since in the research mentioned, a facilitator of these aggressive behaviors

mainly originated from the underemployment of men and successful employment of women

outside the house context (Hynes et al., 2015).

Another qualitative study emphasizes on the work of social workers, and the double standard

that exists within a couple, and more specifically in relationships that there exists a history of

domestic abuse (Pitman, 2017). Referring to the study, as coercive control is a critical skill

amongst social workers, in order to assess and recognize the situations needed, it is more often

than not difficult to apply the double standard of men and women in regards to domestic abuse,

with social workers leaning towards the concept of a male perpetrator and a woman victim,

thus empowering the already existing developmental discourse of gender violence and control

(Pitman, 2017). The last study refers to the men who have been victims to domestic violence

from women in Bangladesh, stating that the predominant social actions in these cases involve

silence and reservation from the media, and the constitutions, highlighting the victimhood

discourse which places women as a “likelihood” of being the victim, with the study suggesting

actions such as “breaking the social prejudice associated with that kind of violence, and create

gender-neutral legal interventions and laws to protect men at home from violence” (Khan &

Arendse, 2021). Considering some of the evident discourses that have been constructed around

gender differences and domestic violence, the current study aims to analyze the Johnny Depp

and Amber Heard case, regarding both the court that took place in 2022 and the articles that

Markel Marishta et.al. Johnny Depp and amber heard: how language and societal influences shape power and

discourses

International Journal of Research and Review (ijrrjournal.com) 136

Volume 11; Issue: 2; February 2024

have been written both during and afterwards. The aim of this study does not involve in

highlighting why the case took place, but how language was used in order to construct

discourses, how power was obtained and how the role of the media and the social context

helped change or sustain the discourses in question. In contrast to quantitative studies, an FDA

analysis does not aim to generalize the findings that are presented, as it regards both of the

parties as unique, as the time, the place, the culture and the variable of Johnny Depp and Amber

Heard being celebrities, all fit in within a specific context that cannot be replicated.

METHODOLOGY

The foundations around Foucauldian discourse analysis are based on the epistemology of social

constructionism, which can be explained by observing some of the key factors that this

epistemology uses. Social constructionism refers to the nature of knowledge as not being a

direct reflection of an objective reality, rather that it is constructed through social processes,

based on social interactions, cultural norms and historical contexts that maintain or change it

(Burr & Dick, 2017). Meaning making in a social constructionist view is not inherit in object

or events, rather it is assigned through language and communication. The words and language

used, are assigned to create discourses and convey knowledge, in which the meaning is socially

and culturally interpreted differently (Young & Collin, 2004). The epistemology bases its’

views on subjectivity rather than objectivity, reinforcing a notion of multiple perspectives in

understanding social phenomena. In cause of this notion, social context and power relations

play a major role in understanding how discourses are constructed and how knowledge is

conveyed, since social constructionism analyze how power structures often influence these

constructions influence social categories such as identities, categories and hierarchies within a

societal environment (Khan & MacEachen, 2021). Thus, reflexivity and critical awareness is

encouraged in this analytical approach, to approach a construct considering the context,

historical notions and cultural behaviors, in order to gain a deeper understanding of the social

world.

Considering the analytical approach of Foucauldian Discourse Analysis, there are 6 analytical

steps involving FDA analysis. Firstly, identifying the discourses and discursive constructions,

which are comprised by systems of ideas beliefs and practices that shape knowledge and power

domes, then applying a historical analysis on the discourses, in order to understand and observe

how the discourse might have been created, how it has evolved over time and its’ relationship

to broader sociopolitical and cultural dynamics (Willig, 2008). Action orientation, the third

analytic step, refers to the ways that the discourses function in order to produce certain

behaviors or beliefs. This happens with the power that language upholds, and aims to create

specific subjectivities around a theme, regulating this behavior and shapes social practices. The

production of knowledge, how it is produced and circulated within the discourse and the

strategies that are presented in how and what the considered “truths” are established. Subject

formation refers to how individuals are positioned and are constituted as subjects within the

discourse, including the ways in which identities, roles and social categories are produced and

maintained. (Willig, 2008). The fifth step, which is practice, refers to the various ways

discourses are enacted, embodied and materialized in a wider social and institutional context.

Practice is not only bound to individualized acts and behaviors, but it is embedded within

social, cultural and historical context. These are influenced by the discourses and the power

relations that operate within a society, and contribute to the production and maintenance of

norms, knowledge and subjectivity. Subjectivity, the final analytical step, refers to the way

individuals within a society are placed as subjects within specific discourse and power

relations, enabling the formation of identity, selfhood and the constant internalization of social

values, norms and “available” knowledge. Subjectivity is a major part that is affected by power

relations, since discourses function in order to discipline and control individuals within it,

Markel Marishta et.al. Johnny Depp and amber heard: how language and societal influences shape power and

discourses

International Journal of Research and Review (ijrrjournal.com) 137

Volume 11; Issue: 2; February 2024

shaping their points of view, desires and behaviors as a whole. In the attempt of analyzing this

step, the ways that discourses operate, how they regulate behavior and normalize certain forms

of subjectivity will be revealed and discussed (Willig, 2008).

The data that was used for the analysis refers to the 4 articles that were written about the 2020

and 2022 domestic violence trial, in which 2 were used in the analysis, that involved the actors

Johnny Depp and Amber Heard, and also the live video recording of the defamation lawsuit.

The articles were collected from ProQuest via the digital library of the University of Derby,

and also from various independent articles that derived from Google, as well as YouTube, since

the articles that were used in the analysis aimed to contain forms of subjectivity in the case and

a descriptive factor around the life and actions both inside and outside the court environment

and also in order to analyze language directly emerging from the live trial, videos that contained

these information was necessary. The databases were searched for articles containing the terms

“Johnny Depp”, “Amber Heard”, “trial”, published from April 2020 to February 2023. Articles

below 300 words were excluded. This form of data collection, mainly including articles and

videos compliment the use of Foucauldian discourse analysis, since the aim of the analysis is

to assess and analyze the use of language, the style of which the language is either written or

spoken, and observe how language constructs discourses, how it maintains and shifts power

relation and the way that subject positions are formed, through a series of FDA analytical tools

(Willig, 2008). The study followed the guidelines of General Data Protection Regulations.

ANALYSIS

This covers the themes that were derived from the 4 articles and video recording regarding the

Johnny Depp and Amber Heard case. Specifically, this part of the analysis will be divided into

three parts, considering the three different themes that are discussed, where each of the themes

describes one or more discourses, the power relation between either societal values and the

discourse, or the subject positions within the discourses. The first theme refers to gender

discourses, how gender norms were brought up and used before, during and after the court case,

and how these structures were either changed or empowered. The second refers to the court

environment. This theme is heavily focused on how truth and the multiple perspectives that

surround it is treated within a court environment. Language, power relations between the actors

and jury and “outside” structures such as media outlets are considered power domes and the

interplay between them and the court are the main discussion point. The last one refers to

Johnny Depp and Amber Heard being public figures, and how the accusations and the subject

positions of each of them influences and also are influenced by historical discourses, are

represented by already existing societal groups such as the MeToo movement, or even go

against them.

Johnny Depp vs Amber Heard, Man vs Woman

The first extract is from the widely popular UK article called “THE SUN”. It refers to a trial

that was held in 2021 and refers to gender norms based on mainly evolutionary and historical

discourses based around men and the position that they uphold in a society, with a use of

specific language and terms that enhance its’ discursive power (Willig, 2008).

Extract 1

[headline] – OUT OF HIS DEPP Wife-beater Johnny Depp LOSES bid to appeal ruling after

The Sun revealed he beat ex Amber Heard 12 times.

1. A judge at the High Court ruled we were right to brand Depp, 57, a "wife beater"

2. for the brutal attacks on his ex, 34.

3. ………….

4. Top judges today dramatically ruled against the Hollywood actor as the appeal has

5. "no real prospect of success"

Markel Marishta et.al. Johnny Depp and amber heard: how language and societal influences shape power and

discourses

International Journal of Research and Review (ijrrjournal.com) 138

Volume 11; Issue: 2; February 2024

(Article, The Sun, lines 1-2, 6-7).

This extract begins with characterizing Johnny Depp as a “Wife-beater” before announcing his

name. It can be seen that from the beginning, the language used constructs Johnny Depp as

being a violent man towards Amber Heard, who is a woman, already formulating the positions

of the ex-couple in their relationship. The term “Wife-beater”, is one of the multiple terms that

are up to a point “common”, meaning that these terms have been used frequently to describe

and input individual men who show aggressive behaviors towards women, in a type of group

within a society, as it can be derived by some of the articles mentioned in the introduction,

which refer to women having the majority of the public’s spotlight regarding domestic abuse

towards them, where when referring to having the man as the victim and not the perpetrator, a

lack of interest and attention can be seen

(Bhatasara, Chevo & Changadeya, 2013; Hynes et al., 2015; Khan & Arendse, 2021 Pitman,

2017), therefore constructing the discourse of the man being the perpetrator and woman being

the victim as a logical and common factor. This places Johnny Depp, the man, as a subject of

higher access to power in regard to the woman, Amber Heard, and also, it constructs a more

Patriarchal view in regards to the description of the actors’ relationship dynamic (Hollway,

1984). Later in the extract, the author briefly mentions both actors’ age, which aims to place

again Johnny Depp as a subject of higher power within their relationship, as in having an age

difference of 23 years. Within the context of a westernized society in 2021, this can be seen as

“abnormal” and from a historical context, this type of norm exists in either “eastern” societies

or in the past where in both cases the man was the one that held the power within a relationship

(Hollway, 1984). The last part of the extract enforces the discursive power of the man being

the perpetrator and the woman the victim as “common”, as it states that top judges around

Amber Heard’s domestic abuse claims against the actor ruled over the actor’s appeal by stating

that it would have “no real prospect of success”, showing the subject position of Johnny Depp

in this Discourse as already guilty, without being given an opportunity to deny it.

Extract 2

1. The last-ditch attempt by Depp saw old claims Ms Heard was a "gold

2. digger" - dismissed by the High Court previously - dragged back up in

3. another character assassination.

4. His lawyer Andrew Caldecott QC said the claim was a "calculated and

5. manipulative lie", which gave Ms Heard "a considerable boost to her

6. credibility as a person".

(The Sun, lines, 46-51)

This extract refers to a Discourse that was brought up by Johnny Depp, to which he claimed in

the past that Amber Heard was a “gold digger”. This discourse refers to women essentially

taking advantage of a man’s economic status, by creating a relationship with them, in order to

obtain their economical state for themselves afterwards. This creates Amber Heard’s subject

position as a perpetrator against Johnny Depp (Willig, 2008), regarding himself as a victim,

which relates to the norm of women taking advantage of men, as Johnny Depp is considered a

globally successful actor, placing him in a higher sociocultural hierarchical status in

comparison to Amber Heard. The later claims of Johnny Depp’s previous lawyer that “the

claim was a calculated and manipulative lie” brings to light possibly a socially acceptable

construct. Firstly, that the discourse of a woman being a “gold-digger”, can be said to “mirror”

the sociocultural effects of being an abusive man, since in the extract the claims of Amber

Heard being a “gold-digger” were said to be calculated and manipulative, meaning that since,

according to the extract, Johnny Depp’s claims could be calculated, a pre-existing discourse of

differential equality between genders and abusive claims could be evident, when comparing

those two. Further empowering this discourse, it was said that since these claims were denied,

Amber Heard’s “credibility” as a person was “boosted”, which by this statement, the inner

Markel Marishta et.al. Johnny Depp and amber heard: how language and societal influences shape power and

discourses

International Journal of Research and Review (ijrrjournal.com) 139

Volume 11; Issue: 2; February 2024

workings of the discourse regarding culturally accepted truths can be said to be evident, since

in this particular case, the denial of Amber being a “gold-digger” empowered her position of

being the victim in her domestic abuse claims against Johnny Depp, therefore possibly creating

or empowering a pre-existing gender double standard discourse in regards to abuse (Hollway,

1984).

Truth in Court: An interplay of power

This theme will analyze extracts that were derived from the live courtroom considering the

defamation lawsuit of Johnny Depp against Amber Heard. Social constructionism, being the

main theoretical foundation behind FDA analysis, explains how reality can and is subjective,

with language being a powerful tool that helps create societal norms, structures and therefore

truths (Khan & MacEachen, 2021). The court environment heavily relies on language, as it

bases the exploration of truth in the context of the accusers and defenders saying, as well as

evidence and fundamentally, in order for a truth to be accepted, most of the times the jury

makes the final decision, meaning that the participants in a law case are shifting their focus

onto constructing a subject position for themselves that a jury environment would support.

Extract 3

1. Johnny Depp:… she brought up the situation of the - her - f-f-f-fecal matter on the-

2. bed, and- I.- hahah, umm and she tried to blame it on the dogs

(Live court defamation lawsuit derived from YouTube)

Before engaging in the part of the analysis, some context will be provided that was not input

in an extract in order to better understand and explain the analysis. Before this testimony from

Johnny Depp, as it was later found as evidence, Johnny Depp did not want this information to

be public, in sake of their privacy (cited by live court defamation lawsuit derived from

YouTube). Moving to the analysis, the actors Johnny Depp and Amber Heard, in spite of the

different power dynamics that exist between the two considering their relationship, it can be

said that due the context of a court environment taking place, their subject position’s powers

are mainly controlled by other subjects within the discourse (Willig, 2008) of the court such as

lawyers, jury, the judge and in this particular case, the greater percentage of the world, since

this lawsuit is being broadcasted live on YouTube. Johnny Depp’s subject position in that

matter has been constructed as relaxed, playful and truthful. This can be explained by the third

extract, in which Johnny Depp shares private information about Amber Heard about the fecal

matter that she produced on their bed. While firstly it can be seen that the actor takes long

pauses, and hesitates in sharing this story, reflecting on what it was mentioned before that he

did not want to engage in this information exposure, he was later found laughing as he was

telling it and even ridicule it as he later said that Amber “tried to blame it on the dogs”. As it

was mentioned before that subject positions and power within the discourse of the court are the

main vital factors for the pursuit of truth, Johnny Depp uses language in order to construct a

subjective truth about Amber Heard, that based on her constructed behaviour, she acts against

unwritten societal rules and accepted norms of both the people attending the court and outside

of it (Willig, 2008), since it is being broadcasted. This, in an attempt to diminish the subject

position of Amber Heard, the constant shift of power dynamics can be observed, and also an

evident factor of how language is used to construct a perception of the world, or in this case a

perception of a subject position within the discourse (Khan & MacEachen, 2021; Willig, 2008).

Extract 4

1. Johnny Depp text message: …… I NEED. I WANT. I TAKE.

2. Amber Heard’s lawyer: did I read that right? Johnny Depp: You read that right

3. -tthat I did not write that……..

4. Amber Heard’s lawyer: When you got off that plane from Boston, you-you-you did

5. know that miss Heard was angry with you

Markel Marishta et.al. Johnny Depp and amber heard: how language and societal influences shape power and

discourses

International Journal of Research and Review (ijrrjournal.com) 140

Volume 11; Issue: 2; February 2024

6. Johnny Depp: (inaudible)…sh-she was always angry yes…..

(Live court Defamation lawsuit derived from YouTube)

This extract, in the same nature as the previous one, uses language as a way to construct a

different subject position regarding Johnny Depp. While the text messages that were not

mentioned in this extract, referred to explicit conversations in the company of the actor’s friend

about a woman, the last text is the one that the analysis is going to be based on, as it constructs

the actor’s subject position upon a toxic masculinity discourse (Hollway, 1984), in which the

man can get and will get the thing he wants, hindering possible acts of enforcement or violence.

This refers to the developmental and biological discourse that since the man has biological

advantages when it comes to physical power, and through developmental and historical

contexts that the man was the hunter/provider in regard to the woman which is the

nurturer/caregiver, that the man has and should have the control (Hollway, 1984). This is

followed by Amber’s lawyers attempts to paint the subject position of Amber being angry at

Johnny as logical and therefore constructing a character that does satisfy the norm that exists

within the 2020s westernized cultural context. Lastly, an attempt by the actor can be seen as

regarding the question that Amber’s lawyer provided, in order to defend his subject position as

a quiet and caring character, Johnny mentions that “she was always angry”, placing him in the

role of the victim, showing resistance to the toxic masculinity discourse, and furthermore

constructing a counter-discourse in which the perpetrator is the woman, while the victim is the

man (Willig, 2008). This counter-discourse, while it can be argued to exist already in the

modern westernized societies of the 2010s, the influence of having a major public lawsuit

involving two globally public figures heavily influences the structures of both the dominant

discourse which can be considered the patriarchal discourse (Hollway, 1984) and its’ counter-

discourse respectively.

Extract 5

1. Johnny Depp’s Lawyer: What were you referring to when you said you and miss

2. Heard would write a letter together?

3. Johnny Depp: (pause) –I was trying to make a peaceful settlement

4. Johnny Depp’s Lawyer: And what were you referring to when you said you lost a

5. finger?

6. Johnny Depp: A large bottle of Vodka severing my- index- errr- myy middle finger-

7. In Australia.

8. …………

9. Johnny Depp’s Lawyer: And what did you say in response when miss Heard said

10. tell the world Johnny, tell them Johnny Depp, I Johnny Depp, a man, I’m a victim

11. to- of domestic violence?

12. Johnny Depp: (smirks) I said yes! - - I am.

(Live court Defamation lawsuit derived from YouTube)

This extract was considered one of the most important pieces of information that were

mentioned throughout the trial’s process, that helped Johnny Depp win over Amber Heard. The

recording that was shown before the beginning of this extract involved both actors having a

conversation with each other about resolving their differences in private, considering their

domestic abuse claims that were already public. Johnny Depp’s lawyer begins questioning the

actor in a way that constructs the characterization of victimhood for the actor. The lawyer

mentioned firstly the injuries that the actor suffered, and also that they were caused by Amber

Heard. This reinforces the previously mentioned counter-discourse of gender abuse that was

analyzed, referring to the victim as being the man, which resists the power of the dominant

discourse of the man being the perpetrator (Hollway, 1984). Language as it has been mentioned

numerous times throughout this analysis is one of the most vital factors regarding the court’s

discourse processes, and the way that language, both verbal and non-verbal language is used

Markel Marishta et.al. Johnny Depp and amber heard: how language and societal influences shape power and

discourses

International Journal of Research and Review (ijrrjournal.com) 141

Volume 11; Issue: 2; February 2024

between Johnny Depp and the court, constructs the world around it based on what is true, and

what is acceptable, not only in the power dynamics involved between Johnny Depp and Amber

Heard, but the power dynamics that take place in the wider sociocultural context outside the

court environment, due to both of the actors’ subject positions in this discourse (Willig, 2008).

By placing the actor Amber Heard, a public member of the MeToo movement (The Sun, 2021),

as a perpetrator of physical abuse against her older ex-husband Johnny Depp, this can be said

to deconstruct some of the “foundations” that held the Patriarchal discourse (Hollway, 1984),

in opposition with the counter-discourse of the man being the victim in domestic abuse related

confrontations (Willig, 2008). This can also be derived by the last question of Johnny Depp’s

lawyer, to which she quoted Amber in saying what is your answer to “tell them Johnny, tell

them that I, Johnny Depp, a Man, I’m a victim of domestic abuse”, to which he responded yes.

The lawyer constructed a subject position for Johnny Depp, that not only Amber, but the norm

that exists, would think a man posing as a domestic abuse victim would be irregular and

irrational. These communication tools, using both language and verbal cues, constructed an

accepted discourse within the court environment that the man being the victim was not

irrational, but a successfully constructed truth.

Public media and movements regarding public individuals.

The last theme aims to explain and analyze the way public media outlets and movements were

influenced by two public individuals, Johnny Depp and Amber Heard. This theme focuses on

the conceptualization of cultural contexts. Historical and cultural structures are presented in

this theme by analyzing how societies evolve, change throughout time and the processes that

take place in order to make that change, which in this essay it revolves around the case of

Johnny Depp and Amber Heard. Social structures such as the MeToo movement and the

feminism movement will be discussed.

Extract 6

1. Johnny Depp: … We write a letter together –

2. Amber Heard: ok

3. Johnny Depp: saying- that we are going to get this away from the public eye

4. …..

5. SAYING – that the MEDIA- has created such a FUCKING hateful storm – that is

6. sickening..

7. ……

8. that we had fights in the past that we had this or whatever - it doesn’t matter, here’s

9. the deal (interrupted)

10. Amber Heard: NO IT DOES MATTER – (inaudible), my credibility has been taken

11. from (interrupted)

12. Johnny Depp: Amber! (inaudible) – th – the abuse – y -you – you have to deal with

13. that -

14. …….

15. Amber - - - I – I lost a fucking FINGER man come on

16. Amber Heard: you – you could say it was a fair fight.

(Live court Defamation lawsuit derived from YouTube)

This extract includes a conversation between Johnny Depp and Amber Heard, conversing about

how it would be in their both best interest if they ended the public defamation lawsuit and

resolved their issues in private. Johnny Depp initiates this idea, by constructing a discourse

involving public media, that in quote “the media has created such a FUCKING hateful storm

– that is sickening”. This discourse portrays how the public media attempts to blame and

exaggerate the individual’s conflicts, placing the subject positions of Johnny and Amber as two

subjects were anything that they do and say, can seem as either guilty and punishable, creating

Markel Marishta et.al. Johnny Depp and amber heard: how language and societal influences shape power and

discourses

International Journal of Research and Review (ijrrjournal.com) 142

Volume 11; Issue: 2; February 2024

a hierarchical structure in which the media and the people, are higher in that structure, by

collectively verbally diminish each party involved (Donegan, 2022). As reality, is considered

to be created by the use of language and laws around a society, the language used by the

culture’s “participants”, can be considered to mirror a collective construct of acceptance,

meaning that the factor that decides what is acceptable and what is not in a societal and

historical context is its’ people. That can also be viewed by the claims of Amber Heard as she

states that her credibility has been ruined, further empowering the hierarchical status of the

media being above her, while also mentioning that the nature of the career of both parties being

actors, thus public figures, their subject positions regarding their career and society depend on

the public’s normative laws.

The last two lines of this extract show a constant motif that emerges throughout this analysis.

While Johnny Depp tries to construct a position of victimhood within their relationship, by

saying that she lost him his finger, Amber tries to deconstruct his subjective role by quoting

“you could say it was a fair fight”. A constant discourse surrounding Johnny Depp revolves

around a more modern cultural structure that men are not getting enough attention on matters

such as domestic abuse (Khan & Arendse, 2021). While on the other hand, Amber Heard is

resisting this discourse by empowering her position within a more historical discourse

(Hollway, 1984), in which the fact that she cannot deny her involvement in her ex’s husband

injury with his finger, she tries to construct a reality in which this was acceptable, by saying

that this was a fair fight, were if taking into consideration her subject position throughout the

trial, Amber was placed in a more developmental discourse herself, with beliefs that since the

man developmentally is physically more enhanced (Hollway, 1984)), this would not be

considered a fair fight, thus inclining more on her attempting to deconstruct Johnny’s discourse,

rather than resolve their problems.

Extract 7

1. “I spoke up against sexual violence – and faced our culture’s wrath.”

2. …..

3. This trial has turned into a public orgy of misogyny. While most of the vitriol in

4. nominally directed at Heard, it is hard to shake the feeling that really, it is directed

5. at all women – and in particular, at those of us who spoke out about gendered abuse

6. and sexual violence during the height of the #MeToo movement. We are in a

7. moment of virulent antifeminist backlash…

8. …

9. One woman has been made into a symbol of a movement that many view with fear

10. and hatred, and she’s being punished for that movement

(The guardian, The Amber Heard – Johnny Depp trial was an orgy of misogyny, lines, 8-9, 59-

64)

This extract engages on a different point of view, referring to how the conflict between Johnny

Depp and Amber Heard has affected two different westernized cultured constructions. The first

line refers to what Amber Heard mentioned in her article on The Sun, which directly brings to

light the feminism discourse. The language used in the first line constructs the normative reality

of how women are treated when they speak out about their sexual abuse experiences. By the

line “faced our culture’s wrath”, an indication of an existent hierarchical status can be

observed, where women are objectified, and mistreated by the culture’s standards in regards to

themes as sexuality and abuse (Hollway, 1984), co-existing with the historical discourse of

toxic masculinity and patriarchy, in which women’s status in the wider societal context,

considering their position in society, are often seen as below their counterpart’s position. The

author of this article further engages in this statement, claiming that the trial between the actor’s

reflected how women all across the world are treated. As Amber Heard is a public figure which

supports the MeToo movement, the author constructed a link between the MeToo movement

Markel Marishta et.al. Johnny Depp and amber heard: how language and societal influences shape power and

discourses

International Journal of Research and Review (ijrrjournal.com) 143

Volume 11; Issue: 2; February 2024

and the loss of Amber Heard’s trial appearance as a “predictable” outcome, where women who

speak out about abuse claims are more often than not shut down, claiming that the society has

constructed an anti-feminist discourse, countering therefore the feminist act which originated

in the 70s (Hollway, 1984). This statement refers to women being powerless, re-constructing

the patriarchal discourse that, as it was analyzed before, Johnny Depp attempted to resist,

placing men higher in the society’s hierarchy as normative, and placing Amber Heard and

women as a group going against it, and attempting to change it.

DISCUSSION

In the part of the analysis, three major themes surrounding the Johnny Depp and Amber Heard

domestic abuse case were analyzed. The first one being the gender differences that were

constructed between the two parties. The second theme focused on the context of the trial

environment and how laws and language are constructed differently within this context. The

last theme focused on social constructions such as the MeToo movement and the feminism act

and how these were indirectly affected by the interplay of power between Johnny Depp and

Amber Heard.

Furthermore, the first theme reflects on two basic modern gender sexualization discourses. The

patriarchal discourse reflects on how men, from a historical context of showing aggressive

behaviors and a subject position of them being considered as hunters (Hollway, 1984), it

constructs the position of men being sexually violent and abusive towards women as a logical

conclusion in domestic abuse cases, which can correlate with the studies of (Hynes et al., 2015

; Pitman, 2017), which the participants, as well as the researchers exhibited behaviors of

inclining in ideologies of the Man being the perpetrator as normative. This can be further

observed by the claims the author made in the article The Sun and the UK’s legal system, in

which Johnny Depp was targeted as an abusive husband to Amber Heard, without given a

chance to decline these accusations in a court environment, while also having a major

information-sharing structure in UK such as The Sun, to further empower the position of

Johnny Depp being the abuser, as he was subjected to. The second extract, contradictory to the

first one, brought forth a discourse which places women as taking advantage of men’s societal

and economical status for their benefit by creating the term gold-digger (Hollway, 1984)). This

can be seen as a counter-discourse to the previously mentioned one, as the operations behind

this discourse rely on how claims of men being abusive are considered fake constructions that

women make in order to firstly diminish their societal status and obtain their economic status

for themselves. This discourse aims to shift the power that men who are participating in the

patriarchal discourse have, in order for them to obtain the role of the victim rather than the

perpetrator.

The second theme revolves around language and laws within court. Social constructionism

refers to terms that often are considered as mainly biological and immutable, such as gender,

as socially constructed and fluid, with individual’s perceptions and language usage being the

fundamental tools that are used in constructing subjective realities (Young & Colin, 2004).

Considering the theory of social constructionism, the defamation trial regarding Johnny Depp

and Amber Heard involved a significant number of how power relations between them shifted

with the usage of language and presented evidence, which unless the court dismisses, they can

be considered as truths. The court discourse takes into consideration multiple roles that take

part in establishing a decision, ranging from jury, judge, lawyers and in this case public opinion.

Based on this statement, power relations and constructions of subject positions of both Johnny

Depp and Amber Heard were observed, as relating to the third extract that was analyzed,

Johnny Depp shared a private story involving the ex-couple, where Amber defecated in their

bed, accompanied with a slight laughter. This constructed the role of Johnny as being truthful

and likable, while subjecting Amber’s role with accompanied feelings of disgust, a discourse

Markel Marishta et.al. Johnny Depp and amber heard: how language and societal influences shape power and

discourses

International Journal of Research and Review (ijrrjournal.com) 144

Volume 11; Issue: 2; February 2024

in which Johnny is favored both by the jury, and the public media. This was followed by Amber

Heard’s team of revealing explicit texts, in which Johnny Depp showed behaviors such as

sexual violence and force (“I NEED. I WANT. I TAKE.”), which like before, aimed to change

the subject position of Johnny Depp being a likable and honest character, and construct a

different role for the actor as being capable of distributing abusive and “anti-feminist”

behaviors (Donegan, 2022). These instances exhibited a constant pattern that was noticeable

throughout the trial, where the focus did not rely only on telling the truth, but how the jury, the

judge and the public eye would construct their subjective truths regarding the actors (Khan &

MacEachen, 2021), thus emerging the pattern of constantly constructing and deconstructing

Johnny’s and Amber’s subject positions in court, where ultimately Johnny, by stating that he

was indeed a victim of domestic abuse, both empowered his subject position as truthful and

likable, and also went against the discourse that was mentioned in the first theme, of men being

the perpetrators as being common.

The third and final theme refers to the influence that the conflict between the two actors had in

regard to the wider societal context outside the courtroom, as well as how the public media

influenced the relationship between the two actors, where specifically two major movements

were brought up, the MeToo movement, and the feminism act. In the sixth extract, Johnny

described how the media took a persecutory role in their life, as Johnny claimed to have

exaggerated the significance of their claims. This can be said to show some of the processes

that define the wider cultural discourse around domestic abuse, while possibly dividing culture

into two different groups. The ones that go against Johnny Depp, therefore supporting the

Patriarchal discourse, and the ones that go against Amber Heard, supporting the exploiting

discourse, in which women take advantage of men. An example of this possible division can

be seen in the last extract, in which the author is against Johnny Depp’s victory, marking it as

a clear resemblance to what happens when women stand up to domestic abuse (Donegan,

2022). Considering the fact that Amber Heard is part of the MeToo movement, and a public

figure also, this loss, based on the author, resembled not only the actor, but the position of all

women in society, claiming that society operates within anti-feministic laws, therefore

constructing a discourse around women not having the same opportunities and rights as men

have (Donegan, 2022). This claim goes against a study that was mentioned in the introduction,

in which the researchers (Khan & Arendse, 2021) claimed that contradictory to women’s abuse

cases, men do not often get the appropriate recognition and attention needed, as them being the

victims while women are the perpetrators.

CONCLUSION

In conclusion, a key factor that was evident throughout the essay is the concept of fluidity

regarding gender. As Foucauldian Discourse Analysis mentions, laws, norms and truths are

social constructs, and not based only on biological and developmental factors, but rather than

sociocultural concepts within specific contexts. Foucault’s concept of power was a constant

theme that surrounded the case of Johnny Depp and Amber Heard, with power being either

used as a tool of creation of discourses, resisting discourses or altering certain subject positions

within the discourses, while also, the use of language, especially in the court environment, was

in many instances observed to be a tool of constructing subjective realities, hindering concepts

of both power and language as the fundamental tools that are used in constructing the social

world. Future directions involving this study could focus on either other discourses or cultures

that this study did not include, such as taking into consideration eastern cultures and their

historical contexts.

Declaration by Authors

Acknowledgement: None

Markel Marishta et.al. Johnny Depp and amber heard: how language and societal influences shape power and

discourses

International Journal of Research and Review (ijrrjournal.com) 145

Volume 11; Issue: 2; February 2024

Source of Funding: None

Conflict of Interest: The authors declare no conflict of interest.

REFERENCES

1. Bhatasara, S., Chevo, T., & Changadeya, T. (2013). An Exploratory Study of Male Adolescent

Sexuality in Zimbabwe: The Case of Adolescents in Kuwadzana Extension, Harare. Journal of

Anthropology, 2013, 1–11. https://doi.org/10.1155/2013/298670

2. Burr, V., & Dick, P. (2017). Social constructionism. The Palgrave Handbook of Critical Social

Psychology, 59–80. https://doi.org/10.1057/978-1-137-51018-1_4/COVER

3. Christodoulou, H., & Pollard, C. (2021). Wife-beater Depp LOSES bid to appeal after Sun revealed

he hit Heard 12 times. The Sun. https://www.thesun.co.uk/news/14449711/johnny-depp-appeal-

high-court-ruling-abuse-amber-heard/

4. Donegan, M. (2022). The Amber Heard-Johnny Depp trial was an orgy of misogyny | Moira

Donegan. The Guardian. https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2022/jun/01/amber-heard-

johnny-depp-trial-metoo-backlash

5. Erlingsson, C., & Brysiewicz, P. (2013). Orientation among multiple truths: An introduction to

qualitative research. African Journal of Emergency Medicine, 3(2), 92–99.

https://doi.org/10.1016/J.AFJEM.2012.04.005

6. Han, S. (2021). Structuralism and post-structuralism. Routledge Handbook of Social and Cultural

Theory, 40–56. https://doi.org/10.4324/9781315149714-4

7. Hollway, W. (1984). Women’s power in heterosexual sex. Women’s Studies International Forum,

7(1), 63–68. https://doi.org/10.1016/0277-5395(84)90085-2

8. Hynes, M. E., Sterk, C. E., Hennink, M., Patel, S., DePadilla, L., & Yount, K. M. (2015). Exploring

gender norms, agency and intimate partner violence among displaced Colombian women: A

qualitative assessment. Global Public Health, 11(1-2), 17–33.

https://doi.org/10.1080/17441692.2015.1068825

9. Khan, A. R., & Arendse, N. (2021). Female perpetrated domestic violence against men and the case

for Bangladesh. Journal of Human Behavior in the Social Environment, 1–15.

https://doi.org/10.1080/10911359.2021.1927281

10. Khan, T. H., & MacEachen, E. (2021). Foucauldian Discourse Analysis: Moving beyond a Social

Constructionist Analytic. International Journal of Qualitative Methods, 20(1), 160940692110180.

https://doi.org/10.1177/16094069211018009

11. Pitman, T. (2017). Living with Coercive Control: Trapped within a Complex Web of Double

Standards, Double Binds and Boundary Violations. The British Journal of Social Work, 47(1), 143–

161. https://doi.org/10.1093/BJSW/BCW002

12. Smith, J. (2015). Qualitative Psychology: a Practical Guide to Research Methods. Sage

Publications Ltd.

13. Turkel, G. (1990). Michel Foucault: Law, Power, and Knowledge. Journal of Law and Society,

17(2), 170. https://doi.org/10.2307/1410084

14. Willig, C. (2008). Foucauldian discourse analysis. Introducing Qualitative Research in Psychology.

112-131.

15. Young, R. A., & Collin, A. (2004). Introduction: Constructivism and social constructionism in the

career field. Journal of Vocational Behavior, 64(3), 373–388.

https://doi.org/10.1016/J.JVB.2003.12.005

How to cite this article: Markel Marishta, Penelope Louka, Georgios Pilafas. Johnny Depp and amber

heard: how language and societal influences shape power and discourses. International Journal of

Research and Review. 2024; 11(2): 133-147. DOI: https://doi.org/10.52403/ijrr.20240216

Appendices

Table of themes (on next page)

Markel Marishta et.al. Johnny Depp and amber heard: how language and societal influences shape power and

discourses

International Journal of Research and Review (ijrrjournal.com) 146

Volume 11; Issue: 2; February 2024

Themes

Extract

Source

Johnny Depp vs Amber Heard:

Man vs Woman

A judge at the High Court ruled we were right

to brand Depp, 57, a "wife beater"

for the brutal attacks on his ex, 34.

………….

Top judges today dramatically ruled against the

Hollywood actor as the appeal has

"no real prospect of success"

The Sun (lines, 1-2, 6-7)

Johnny Depp vs Amber Heard:

Man vs Woman

The last-ditch attempt by Depp saw old claims

Ms Heard was a "gold

digger" - dismissed by the High Court

previously - dragged back up in

another character assassination.

His lawyer Andrew Caldecott QC said the

claim was a "calculated and

manipulative lie", which gave Ms Heard "a

considerable boost to her

credibility as a person".

The Sun (lines, 54-61)

Truth in Court: An interplay of

power

Johnny Depp:… she brought up the situation of

the - her - f-f-f-fecal matter on the-

bed, and- I.- hahah, umm and she tried to

blame it on the dogs

Live defamation lawsuit derived from YouTube

Truth in Court: An interplay of

power

Johnny Depp text message: …… I NEED. I

WANT. I TAKE.

Amber Heard’s lawyer: did I read that right?

Johnny Depp: You read that right

-tthat I did not write that……..

Amber Heard’s lawyer: When you got off that

plane from Boston, you-you-you did

know that miss Heard was angry with you

Johnny Depp: (inaudible)…sh-she was always

angry yes…..

Live defamation lawsuit derived from YouTube

Truth in Court: An interplay of

power

Johnny Depp’s Lawyer: What were you

referring to when you said you and miss

Heard would write a letter together?

Johnny Depp: (pause) –I was trying to make a

peaceful settlement

Johnny Depp’s Lawyer: And what were you

referring to when you said you lost a

finger?

Johnny Depp: A large bottle of Vodka severing

my- index- errr- myy middle finger-

In Australia.

…………

Johnny Depp’s Lawyer: And what did you say

in response when miss Heard said

tell the world Johnny, tell them Johnny Depp, I

Johnny Depp, a man, I’m a victim

to- of domestic violence?

Johnny Depp: (smirks) I said yes! - - I am.

Live defamation lawsuit derived from YouTube

Public media and movements

against public individuals

Johnny Depp: … We write a letter together –

Amber Heard: ok

Johnny Depp: saying- that we are going to get

this away from the public eye

…..

SAYING – that the MEDIA- has created such

a FUCKING hateful storm – that is

sickening..

……

that we had fights in the past that we had this

or whatever - it doesn’t matter, here’s

the deal (interrupted)

Amber Heard: NO IT DOES MATTER –

(inaudible), my credibility has been taken

from (interrupted)

Johnny Depp: Amber! (inaudible) – th – the

abuse – y -you – you have to deal with

that -

…….

Amber - - - I – I lost a fucking FINGER man

come on

Amber Heard: you – you could say it was a fair

fight.

Live defamation lawsuit derived from YouTube

Public media and movements

against public individuals

“I spoke up against sexual violence – and faced

our culture’s wrath.”

(The guardian, The Amber Heard – Johnny Depp

trial was an orgy of misogyny, lines, 8-9, 59-64)

Markel Marishta et.al. Johnny Depp and amber heard: how language and societal influences shape power and

discourses

International Journal of Research and Review (ijrrjournal.com) 147

Volume 11; Issue: 2; February 2024

Spider-Graph

******

…..

This trial has turned into a public orgy of

misogyny. While most of the vitriol in

nominally directed at Heard, it is hard to shake

the feeling that really, it is directed

at all women – and in particular, at those of us

who spoke out about gendered abuse

and sexual violence during the height of the

#MeToo movement. We are in a

moment of virulent antifeminist backlash…

…

One woman has been made into a symbol of a

movement that many view with fear

and hatred, and she’s being punished for that

movement