I did not learn about the quake and tsunami until 12 or 14 hours after it occurred..my brother in law told me about it when I woke up. But, there were a lot of people in need of help and I could have made an effort in focussing on where the problem was most severe, and I did not do that (beyond a post here the other day that the tsunami was probably much worse over the actual rupture than 1000+ km away in Sri Lanka). It was several days before the news media (at least the ones that I watch or read) started focusing on northern Sumatra and the Nicobar and Andaman Islands. Anyone who understands megathrust earthquakes and tsunamis should have known that the tsunami would normally be much larger over the actual earthquake rupture than it was in Sri Lanka and mainland India. I could have gone through SCEC or the AGU contacts John mentioned to get through to the news organizations that there was going to be a huge disaster and need for assistance over the actual rupture. Even today I still hear on the news (CNN and other) that there was more damage in Banda Aceh because it was closer to the epicenter. I have not heard anyone point out that the epicenter is just one point on a fault that broke over an area that could be as long as 1300 km, and could be as wide as 100 or 200 km (although a rupture that size should have been a M>9.5....the large aftershocks do seem to be pretty evenly distributed between latitude 3N and almost 14 N (111 km/deg latitude)). Banda Aceh is actually sitting right over part of the earthquake rupture. Since the quake propagated north, the ground motion would have been larger 500 km north of the epicenter than at the epicenter (assuming that slip towards the center of the rupture was not much less than at the epicenter).

Anyway...if it was widely disseminated that the damage should be greatest over the rupture, and what this means, maybe this area could have been quickly overflown and the best decisions made for where to rush rescue and relief.

I don't feel guilty at all about not doing this....I can't even get the New York Times to correct pure and simple mistakes.
Chris