Social networking sites aren't an efficient means of communication, they are much like email is now with Spam, you have to filter the dross to get at the small gems of useful information (assuming your Internet connection is still workable). IM in mostly unworkable, better to get on the telephone and speak to the person you want to communicate with or even walk the 20 feet across the office.

Where Internet access is bandwidth restricted such as in an emergency or places like Africa, it is even sometimes more efficient to burn a CD and post it at the local post office.

Fax Machines are quite efficient as well in band width limited areas such as land line only access.

Broadband Internet outages which have large geographical regions can be easily taken out. A large part of Southern England's Internet access (millions affected) went down for over 24hrs after some Router cards were simply just stolen in London's Docklands.

The Internet in the US can effectively be taken down by a dozen Spetznas shovel swings at the right place and time. I really wouldn't rely on the Internet for effective communications especially with the Internet Kill switch is implemented against those who post emergency messages online.

http://www.amfearliathmor.pwp.blueyonder.co.uk/Emergency_Message/ Er..just to state that this is a test of my emergency web page and is not real world.

Why is there the need for the constant up to the second need to be informed electronically about the news media distorted take on events and the second hand gossip?

Take for example the recent 'Storm of the Century' with the constant news media hysterical hyperbole and compare it to the tragic events of 1912..

[img]Pic nuked by Blast because it was too big[/img]