Content
The Reign of the Telegram
For roughly a century, the telegram was the undisputed king of fast, long-distance written messages. Emerging in the mid-19th century alongside the telegraph network, it represented a monumental leap. Suddenly, news that once took days or weeks to travel by post could arrive in hours, sometimes minutes. Sending a telegram involved going to a telegraph office (or calling one), dictating your message, and paying – often per word. This cost structure was the great enforcer of brevity. Every word counted, literally. People developed a unique, clipped style to convey information economically. Superfluous words vanished. Articles like ‘a’ and ‘the’ were often omitted. Punctuation was sometimes spelled out (“QUESTION MARK”) or replaced entirely by the word “STOP” to indicate the end of a sentence, primarily because punctuation marks didn’t translate easily in early systems or cost extra. A message might read: “ARRIVING TUESDAY 5PM STOP MEET AT STATION STOP BRING CARRIAGE STOP LOVE FATHER STOP”. It was functional, direct, and stripped bare. Despite its sparse nature, the telegram carried immense weight. Receiving one often signalled major news – births, deaths, emergencies, urgent business deals. The yellow envelope, hand-delivered by a messenger, could bring elation or dread. It played a crucial role in coordinating troop movements during wars, enabling journalists to file breaking news reports (the term “wire service” comes directly from this era), and allowing businesses to operate across vast distances with unprecedented speed. It shaped how people perceived time and distance in relation to information.The first commercial electrical telegraph line was co-developed by William Fothergill Cooke and Charles Wheatstone. It entered service on the Great Western Railway in Britain in 1838. Samuel Morse independently developed a different system in the United States, famously demonstrated in 1844 with the message “What hath God wrought”. These innovations laid the groundwork for global telecommunication networks.The telegram wasn’t just about emergencies, though. People sent congratulatory messages, brief updates, and even used specialized services for singing telegrams or sending money orders. It was woven into the fabric of daily life for many, the standard way to communicate quickly when face-to-face or postal mail wasn’t feasible.
Bridging the Gaps
While the telegram held sway for a long time, other technologies bubbled up. Telex machines, essentially networked teleprinters, became common in businesses from the mid-20th century onwards. They allowed for direct point-to-point typed messages, offering more conversational potential than telegrams but still largely confined to the corporate world. Fax machines later allowed transmission of documents over phone lines, but neither truly replaced the telegram’s role for brief, personal, urgent messages for the general public.The Digital Dawn and the Birth of SMS
The real successor to the telegram arrived with the mobile phone revolution. While email had already digitized written communication, it often retained the longer format of traditional letters and required a computer. The game-changer for *brief* personal messaging was the Short Message Service, or SMS. Interestingly, SMS wasn’t initially seen as a major feature. It was developed almost as an afterthought within the GSM mobile phone standard in the 1980s, designed to use spare capacity in the network’s signaling channels. The first SMS message, “Merry Christmas,” was famously sent on December 3, 1992, from a computer to a mobile phone on the Vodafone network in the UK. What made SMS take off was its inherent constraint and accessibility. Like the telegram, it imposed a strict limit: 160 characters. This wasn’t an arbitrary number; it was based on optimizing the use of those signaling channels. This limitation, combined with the initial cost per message charged by many carriers, immediately fostered a new form of abbreviated language. Forget “STOP”; now we had “LOL,” “BRB,” “OMG,” “U,” “R,” and countless other initialisms and shortenings designed to cram maximum meaning into minimal space. The rise of texting was phenomenal. It perfectly suited the mobile context – quick thoughts, confirmations, location updates, brief check-ins. It became the default way for younger generations to communicate, often preferred over voice calls. Its asynchronous nature was also appealing; you could send a message anytime, and the recipient could reply when convenient, unlike a phone call demanding immediate attention.From Text Speak to Instant Messaging Overkill?
The culture of brevity established by SMS persisted even as technology evolved. Multimedia Messaging Service (MMS) allowed sending pictures and longer texts, but the core text-based brevity often remained. Then came the explosion of internet-based Instant Messaging (IM) apps – WhatsApp, Facebook Messenger, Telegram (the app, ironically borrowing the name!), Signal, and others. These apps, leveraging mobile data or Wi-Fi, largely eliminated the per-message cost and the strict 160-character limit. Yet, the *style* of communication often remained brief. We gained features like group chats, read receipts (the infamous blue ticks!), emojis, GIFs, and stickers, adding layers of nuance, emotion, or humour that plain text lacked. Communication became richer, potentially more expressive, but still fundamentally rapid-fire and concise compared to email or letters. One could argue that the pendulum has swung slightly back. While telegrams forced brevity through cost and technology, and SMS through character limits, today’s IM offers near-limitless space. Yet, social convention and the sheer volume of messages often encourage keeping things short. A wall of text in an IM chat can feel overwhelming or demanding.Echoes Across Time: Telegrams vs. Texts
Looking back, the parallels are striking. Both telegrams and early SMS messages were:- Technology-driven: Relying on new infrastructure (telegraph wires vs. mobile networks).
- Cost-conscious (initially): Per-word pricing for telegrams, per-message pricing for early SMS, both encouraging economy of language.
- Brevity-focused: Constraints forced users to develop shorthand and omit pleasantries.
- Impactful: Capable of conveying urgent and important information rapidly.
- Transformative: Fundamentally changing how people communicated over distance.
The very brevity that makes text-based communication efficient can also lead to misunderstandings. Lacking tone of voice and body language, short messages can easily be misinterpreted. Sarcasm may fall flat, or a curt reply intended for speed might be perceived as rude. Always consider context and clarity when relying on brief written messages.The evolution continues. Features blur between platforms, voice notes offer a verbal alternative to typing, and video calls provide face-to-face interaction. Yet, the simple act of typing out a few short words and hitting ‘send’ remains a dominant mode of communication. From the sparse, costly words tapped out in Morse code or on teleprinters to the emoji-laden, lightning-fast exchanges on our smartphones, the desire for brief written communication endures. Technology provides the tools, constraints shape the language, but the fundamental human need to connect quickly and concisely across space remains the driving force. The telegram may be a relic of the past, but its spirit lives on in every text message we send.
