I don't buy it. Either he's focused on only one segment of the internet population (individuals, not businesses), or it's more wishful thinking regarding social networking.
Just what, exactly, is deemed so terrible about email? Shouldn't this be analyzed via mass correspondence vs. individual-to-individual? I think the author is greatly overgeneralizing, and thus drawing misleading conclusions.
The Gotham Gal looked at me and said "why are you checking twitter and not email?" ... I told her that email required a reply and twitter did not.
And sometimes I dare not ask to be removed from some senders' lists for political reasons.
Time-sucking. Soul-sucking. grrrr...
EDIT: forgot to mention that sorting through the krap via Twit, FB, etc, would not be much more fun.
SMS traffic grew rapidly as well, but it did not take away the voice business.
Lately, I've been taking notes on this. These are not bad observations:
http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=1223346 - Networking advices from legendary Silicon Valley networker, Heidi Roizen - 90% of my interactions are on email (and I will say that is the same for almost all highly efficient people I know)
http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=1248503 - Ron Conway Explained - (quoted email) “AM ON IT.”
http://www.tbray.org/ongoing/When/201x/2010/03/28/Compartmen... - Communication Silos - They differ in their latency, reach, and persistence and, on another axis, in length of form.