The above two comments are a bit off the point. The point is the message, not the messenger. Who cares if individuals in the movement are "arrogant and narcissistic"... and I certainly don't need a report on how the protesters or the park might smell after a few months. They point is... OWS is right. And because the MIT prof is not destitute... that means he's not right about the 1%? Absurd. Because the protesters actually buy things means they don't have the right to critique global corporate financial capitalism? That's just silliness.

The media ("liberal" or otherwise) makes a mistake when they offer little personality profiles of the occupiers or try to "characterize" the movement. The message is the story:
The top 1 percent of Americans possess a greater net worth than the entire bottom 90 percent.
There's your "pile of poo under the christmas tree." People are finally waking up to an understanding of what that means for the rest of us.

As the protesters rail against corporations, what was the the role of corporations in providing everything from the "hand painted signs" to "real time life streaming" as well MIT and NPR salaries and last but not least, the power cleaning of Zuccotii Park?

Is the "women only safety tent" on its way to the Smithsonian to preserve for the ages those who have had "their lives transformed by participating in the process" of this "laboratory of democracy" across the nation?
A movement created with "media savvy" based on the arrogant and narcissistic lies of "this is what democracy looks like" and "we are the 99 percent" is still an arrogant and narcissistic lie.

This commentary is the intellectual equivalent of spraying floral air freshener over the effluvia of OWS. Considering student loans are a big source of the temper tantrums at the protests, how much does a MIT professor make nowadays not to mention the journalists equiped with their rose tinted blinders which blocks out the more unpleasant sights, sounds and smells of OWS.
The Tea Party forced the news media to use all of its investigative talents to tirelessly excavate the supposedly sinister underside of that movement with little to show for it in three years yet in two months the Occupy movement's overflowing criminal rap sheet which is available for public review are deliberately ignored or downplayed by most of the national media.

One would think that a program whose mandate is to analyze the media would find the Tea Party/Occupy coverage a fascinating topic to examine unless of course the conclusion ripped to shreds the precious security blanket known as the "progressive" media narrative.
Better to suspend disbelief on OWS and have the media and academia behave like the coddled boy on Christmas morning who finds a pile of poo under the tree and excitedly searches for the new pet pony and the other positive "impacts of Occupy".