>From the beginning of OWS, The Times sent the excellent Colin Moynihan to write pieces which, I believe, were run in the blog. The Times' first actual news coverage of the occupation was a remarkably condescending and dismissive piece by Ginia Bellafante who has mainly written culture criticism:
The fact that The Times has now joined President Obama in supporting OWS shouldn't be too much of a surprise. OWS has been a property of note for the Punditocracy for at least a week now. And the hirer up the media food chain the editorials get the more reformist they become:
"There are plenty of policy goals to address the grievances of the protesters — including lasting foreclosure relief, a financial transactions tax, greater legal protection for workers’ rights, and more progressive taxation. The country needs a shift in the emphasis of public policy from protecting the banks to fostering full employment, including public spending for job creation and development of a strong, long-term strategy to increase domestic manufacturing."
These prescriptions are the program of the left of center Democratic Party activist base. There is a good chance that they might show up as talking points in the coming election. But can you have "greater legal protections for worker's rights" without seriously restructuring financial institutions and trade agreements? Can you "increase domestic manufacturing" without setting off a tariff war with the country that owns much of your national debt? In the face of these insurmountable questions, the reformist platform of the Democratic Party and the Times opinion page feels more like a stall than anything else; a bone to throw to the angry masses and one without much meat on it.