Response #2

        As we established in class on Wednesday, we are all apart of an increasingly “Written World”. The globe has become too face-spaced for long, drawn-out speeches; in fact, we’d all prefer it if communication could be kept to a 140-character maximum. Interestingly enough, this fondness for print has resulted in a wide variety of new ways in which a ruler can upset his or her masses. Take, for example, the recent controversy over the first tweet sent out by the official Barack Obama Twitter account on September 11th: “The election is in 8 weeks. Sign up to volunteer.” Many Americans have expressed outrage over what they saw as an insensitive call for support on a sacred American day. I think it’s safe to say that Queen Elizabeth would not have had to deal with this kind of crap. In her time, a ruler communicated with his/her people in the form of live speeches. If an unfortunate slip of the tongue occurred, the mishap would probably not extend beyond those in attendance. Today, the President of the United States has over 19 million Twitter followers. Therefore, the ruler of the United States could potentially upset 19 million people instantaneously with less than 140 characters. The modern dependency on the written word (and that little Internet thing) has brought governing bodies closer to the public than ever before. While speeches are still an important part of a ruler’s appearance, they are no longer the only means by which those in power can speak directly to the nation. Written communication through social networking sites like Twitter allows the everyday man to feel closer to the powerful; but now, the powerful must be far more conscious of what they put on paper – or Twitter.