Given the advancements in communication, was a revolution possible?

Although the "revolutionaries" of this chapter of German history were forward-thinking in their efforts to unify Bavaria and become a nation, can one site a lack of compromise between both sides of revolutionaries as the primary cause of failure?

The radical, university-educated liberals of the 1830s wanted change. They strove for a new, more democratic order and wanted more participation within the government. Still, they were not open to universal suffrage, questioning whether the public is mature enough to vote. Also, despite their desire to change the state, many of these individuals work for the government.

Furthermore, radicals and liberals were divided in their methods of gaining momentum. While liberals wanted more association with the democratic process, radicals were ready for a government that was by the people, for the people. And, while liberals were nervous in attracting attention, radicals were anxious to organize full-on protests in the streets.

Collectively, one can blame the failure of Germany's would-be revolution in the nineteenth century on the divisions among the revolutionaries, not forming specific goals to lead to the unification of Germany, religious conflict, and the unspecified role of the middle class. However, given the great influence of technology on communication (i.e. newspapers and telegraphs that brought news regarding the success of the French revolution), a revolution was possible.

Given the advancements of communication, had the liberals and radicals sat down to make compromises and lay down specific goals, could Germany's unification have happened as a result of these revolutionaries?