When the United States was founded 250 years ago, it took three or four days for the fastest message to travel from Boston to Philadelphia. Current print and cable journalists seem to believe the same rules are in effect now. Or so I would gather from the consensus that “90 days” is a frantic whirlwind for a political campaign.
The saying used to be that ” lie can travel around the world before truth can get its boots on.” Now a meme can “go viral” almost before it is spoken. A gigantic news sheet in 1795 had maybe a hundred local readers. An internet post today instantly informs millions or even billions. A day is an eternity.
In those olden times, the larger world had very little, very delayed, effects. Crossing the Atlantic could take months, most remote happenings were of no relevance whatsoever. Now markets crash at bank news reported in minutes from Japan, and the entire planet can be incinerated in an hour or so, at the whim of an angry old fart who feels particularly cranky.
In that context, “90 days” is far longer than most news cycles ever were. People “meet” candidates not from months-long train whistle-stops but in minutes on media.
A true whirlwind might be “9 days”. But then, what would all the writers and talking heads have to talk about?
I’m afraid that this is symptomatic of the endless cynicism I’ve developed about just about every political discussion lately, what “they” say just doesn’t quite match my own reality, in distance, speed, or effect.
HuntingtonHarborThoughts 