The whole article is just fluff and filler-text, not backed up by any facts whatsoever. He mentions a few websites going down (which is not "the internet") and

The whole article is just fluff and filler-text, not backed up by any facts whatsoever. He mentions a few websites going down (which is not "the internet") and he falsely claims google had trouble (which still wouldn't be "the internet" even if it was true). But this is a systemic problem with the Internet, or perhaps put more accurately, the Web. The more people who demand the service provided by an information Web site, the harder it gets for that site to provide that information Yeah right. Actually that's a systemic problem with that particular website then, not with the internet. He completely misses the point about the distributed nature of the internet: "Big breaking news" spreads like wildfire across many sites. So when CNN (not the internet) buckles under load then there is a good chance that you'll still be able to fetch it from a few thousand other sites.