reaching people from the usa to cuba to england to uganda to iraq to mongolia to korea- yes.
reaching the entire world- certainly not.
being able to put information up on the internet that is accessible by 1.2billion people is much different then 1.2 billion people accessing this information. i wouldn't be surprised if more people watched TV advertisements then read something on the internet every day.
the difference between the internet and other forms of mass information delivery is that the internet often offers the readers/watchers a chance to communicate with the people who are putting the information forward, as well as any number of alternate sources. having a huge number of sources isn't necessarily bad because (just like with TV's and new paper's many fewer sources of information) the reader/watcher can choose to believe it or not.
without the internet, people still have the opportunity to get incomplete or wrong information on any subject they can think of, however the internet offers a way for people to get access to accurate information without having to spend tens of thousands of dollars in tuition and many years of life. that alone scores the internet lots of points in my book, despite its shortcomings and other benefits.