Occupy something....or not.

Occupy Wall Street (OWS) is a huge deal! Alternatively, is it? It seems like the first few days the mainstream media always had a segment devoted to OWS and what the latest news from the protest happened to be. However, as the protest continued and more people showed up, the protest wasn’t able to stay on message. At this point it seems like almost everyone is mad, but they’re all mad about something different. This was born from the fact OWS was built on the idea of collective leadership. They hoped they could promote their message as a group and not have one person speaking for everyone. While a noble idea, it seems to have failed. Media coverage of Occupy Wall Street these days is not so much about the message, but about if they smell, are they violent, and when are they going to go home? It’s no longer about the ideas and changes they want to see, but more about should they be allowed to sleep in tents or not? While I understand what they are protesting and agree with a few things, I do not agree with how they chose to portray the message. Comparing it to the civil rights movement and at times being violent isn’t the way to make a calm Midwestern boy like me jump on board, and I think it all comes back to the lack of leadership. With something on this scale with high minded ideas such as these, you need one person or a small group of people to direct the foot soldiers. Cohesion and adherence to message go a long way when trying to create change.