I wouldn't worry too much about Facebook or Twitter or any off the myriad of other instant messaging and social network web sites past and present. They are mainly for young people who don't have really nothing much to say as you have described (there are off course the unusual exceptions), in fact the process of describing how to use the communication tool becomes a totally dull point of conversation for the young folks even in trendy bars . For those who remember AOL IM, Yahoo messaging and even Myspace etc and the all the other now instantly forgettable interweb social media website, folks will soon get tired of the novelty. I remember using instant messaging on an BBC microcomputer Econet (early 80s) years before the invention of Internet World Wide Web, and it held my interest for about 15 minutes.

I still have trouble responding to folks at work who insist on using Microsoft Office Instant Messenger when they are at a desk 20 feet away.

Facebook, Twitter etc is in reality an anti social web site as it creates a tunnel visioned, blinkered view of what is really going on in the world. Just look at Youtube Justin Beiber viewing stats.

We didn't have a problem in the 70s and 80s, when we had 3 TV channels, a few radio channels and half the population didn't even have a POTS telephone in the UK. There was a lot less hysteria, panic, fear mongering and general unease generated by the media and state back then (and we had 1000s of nukes pointed at each other during the cold war).

I think I've got around 3000 unread emails in my inbox at work at the moment.

http://www.itelegram.com/ might be a better tool to ensure your emergency message gets through.

What's this new-fangled teletype stuff? All miscreants and misfits! I still have around 20 telegrams from last year I never got to. I myself prefer smoke signals. Old technology never fails. I already have a fire starting kit in my EDC. It's the easiest way for me to call for help from Rohan.

Da Bing

Don't get me wrong. I like computers but give me the good old days when computers ran on DOS.

Jeanette Isabelle

Another large group of Facebook users are the folks 20 to 50 years past high school who are reconnecting with their old friends. It's a great tool for that.

If in an emergency you want to send a emergency message then sending a cellular phone SMS to your Twitter account is a great tool as well as long as someone is taking account of the online message i.e. 'following' the twitter feed. (assuming that they still have a Internet access i.e. Out with the emergency power outage area). There are many other alternative ways to get the message through to a more targeted audience or recipient.

For example I can send an SMS formated message showing my GPS location if required from a Java app on my Samsung handset. I can also send an SMS message to POTS landline phone (BT Text) where the service provider will create a Robo voice call of the SMS text and place the message into the landline voice mail box. Even better if the recipient end user I am trying to contact has an SMS capable land line phone handset.

Most cellular handsets can also send and receive emails quite readily as well in an emergency. Internet access (getting an IP address) is achievable via landline, ADSL, DSL, Fibre and wireless 2G and 3G access etc. Getting that IP address is what is important, whether you communicate via HTTP, VOIP, FTP, etc or the next layer above the protocol isn't really too important as long as the message recipient is up to speed on the preferred method of emergency message transmit. WAP email portals are also quite efficient for example.

What was quite shocking was that large parts of the East Coast of the USA lost not only Internet access via cable but also telephone landlines (ADSL) as well due to lack of battery or generator backup due to the inclement weather. Does you local post office still allow you to send a telegram?

Social networking will be around for long awhile, even if another corporation supersedes Facebook. Disregarding an obviously efficient means of communication is counterproductive and pointless.

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]

Check your sources. The Titanic was lost in April, 1912, not 1911.

Yes I just noticed after re reading the post and was about to edit it.

I disagree. Facebook saves me a lot of time communicating with family, friends and business associates.