Nowadays, immediate doesn't mean what it used to. It is constructed as the opposite of the much less-popular adjective mediate, i.e. having a mediator, or through a medium. Two recognizable phrases I can think of that illustrate the original meaning of word (as opposed to its most common current usage as a synonym for "instantly") are in the immediate vicinity, or in immediate proximity to, which use the word to describe spatial, rather than temporal relationships.
Now a medium coke stands somewhere between a small and a large, and a medium may be able to get us access to the spirit world (but that access is by definition not immediate). We cannot really say that we have immediate access to God (the Father), because even in the New Covenant, Christ is our mediator, but at least we have more immediate access than before, when an extra layer of priests were required (now we are that priesthood).
Also, despite the most ardent claims of CNN and the like, we cannot have immediate access to news, short of experiencing events in person. For the nature of the media is to be mediators; their purpose is to mediate news to us. There is no way they can attain their stated goal of total objectivity, since they cannot escape the truth in the concept "the medium is the message".
Filed under: Language |