Readers provide advice for future public editor columns.The Occupy Wall Street movement has certainly generated a lot of ink and bytes. Seven weeks into it, the journalistic challenge of covering it has probably grown in complexity. It is not simply a matter of covering the events attending to the individual protests in New York and scattered around the country. There are larger themes to address.  Readers provide advice for future public editor columns.  What are the themes? How should The New York Times cover this movement that resembles no other in memory?  I wanted to start a discussion about that and so I reached out to journalists outside The Times who have been editors and understand the challenge of mobilizing reporters and editors to cover complex stories. I asked them this question:  If you were the assignment editor, and had control over all desks, what are the stories you would like to see about Occupy Wall Street and its affiliated Occupy branches around the U.S. and the world?  A number of people sent me detailed discussions and you will find them below. I am particularly interested, as well, in hearing from readers on this subject. If you were the assignment editor, how would you approach the story?  In addition to coverage schemes, I heard from a couple of former editors who wanted to make more general points. One suggested The Times should examine how OWS relates to the issue of class warfare in America: OWS adherents and conservatives accuse one another of waging class warfare. Are they both right?  Another former editor suggested looking at OWS in the context of new studies that show deepening income disparities, and then looking closely at urban centers where Occupy protesters have taken root. Is it possible that these are places – cities like New York, Boston, Oakland, London – where income disparity is heightened by the concentration of knowledge-based, high-paying industries?  There are many interesting questions and, for The Times and other news organizations, it is not easy to identify the most fruitful avenues of inquiry. Here are some of the ideas suggested by the outside journalists I queried. I want to thank them for offering their thoughts.  Stephen Buckley, dean of faculty, The Poynter Institute; former managing editor, St. Petersburg Times  To my mind, the compelling question driving the Occupy Wall Street story is: How come these people are so angry? And maybe more compellingly: Why did it take them so long to get angry? (We’ve been feeling the effects of a recession for more than four years….)  So, were I an editor, I’d be scrambling to figure out ways to craft narratives around those two questions. So, assuming resources weren’t an issue, here are some questions that would drive upcoming stories (again, with anger as the overarching theme):  Jerry Ceppos, dean, Manship School of Mass Communication, Louisiana State University; former executive editor, San Jose Mercury News  This certainly must be the first significant movement for which I can’t paint a picture of typical leaders and followers. How is that possible? Have I simply not followed the stories carefully? Or have we as journalists covered the forest and failed to profile the trees?  Here are some ways I’d identify the trees:  Rick Rodriguez, professor, Walter Cronkite School of Journalism and Mass Communication, Arizona State University; former executive editor, Sacramento Bee  I would really use the entire array of the Times desks and resources to try to assess whether this movement will be sustained and grow or eventually fizzle. The story is moving beyond New York more each day. Its success ultimately will be judged not only on how it impacts Wall Street but communities across the country and the world. What is happening in Oakland today (Nov. 2) – a call for a general strike – is an example of that. The strike was preceded by police injuring a protester – a war veteran – who has become a martyr, a rallying point for protesters. In Sacramento, my hometown, police are clearing out the park that is being occupied and arresting those who don’t leave by 11 p.m., with 83 arrests made so far, and the protesters are in court challenging the police action. Some of the responses I’ve read from government officials are reminiscent of those made dismissing the civil rights movement – the protesters are people from outside the mainstream (outside agitators?); that the protests are hurting small businesses and neighborhoods; sanitary and other health problems abound. But is anyone listening to the message or will the powers that be simply wait things out? That question intrigues me. So does whether the protesters can grow and diversify their base; can they bring multitudes of working class people, can they appeal to Latinos, African-Americans and others who have been hit hardest by the economic downtown. Predicting the future is hard to do but sending reporters across the country to assess the potential for the movement to grow is where I would start.  Timothy M. Kelly, Lexington Herald-Leader publisher, 1996-2011; editor, 1991-1996  If I were an assigning editor, I’d start with the basic 5 W’s and How. Among the questions I’d want answered:  Tom Fiedler, dean, College of Communication, Boston University; former executive editor, Miami Herald  You’ve posed a thought-provoking question for my imaginary editing position: “What are the stories you would like to see about Occupy Wall Street and its affiliated Occupy branches around the U.S. and the world?”  The answer, in a few words, is that I would only like to see stories that move the event forward. Not to sound glib, but the coverage of “Occupy” brings to mind the old Saturday Night Live chestnut of “Franco is still dead!”, which Chevy Chase would solemnly repeat week after week.  As a journalist vying for the limited and valuable time of an audience, I bear the responsibility of intruding on the audience’s attention only when I have something of interest – something new and worthy (or newsworthy) – to report. Otherwise I’m just an annoyance. Now that I’ve reported exhaustively on the Occupiers’ presence and their general unhappiness with many things, I have no obligation to chronicle their on-going daily existence, which best I can tell has devolved into something of a mixture of Grateful Dead parking-lot scene, Woodstock without bands (although plenty of bongos), and unofficial skid row (e.g., Adam Nagourney’s story, Nov. 1).  So what would I consider to be news? Of course, if today’s reincarnations of Douglas MacArthur and George Patton (or their municipal equivalents) charge into the protesters behind tanks and bayonet-wielding soldiers – that would hit my bar.  To the other extreme, a running blog or newspaper column about life in the Occupy camps – somewhat akin to reports done out of refugee camps on the Somali border, though lacking the human tragedy – would find a small place in my news budget, perhaps anchored in the same place for easy navigation.  But I would otherwise reserve my resources until my reporters found news that disrupts the current equilibrium, or threatens to disrupt it. As an example, if the Occupiers suddenly focused their protest on something in a way that could initiate a public-policy debate – just as the World War I Bonus Army demanded that their bonus bonds be cashed early to help them cope with the Depression – I would order coverage of that development. If they chose to register en masse in a political party and vowed to punish any candidate who failed to vote correctly (in their view) on specific issues, I would see that this was covered. I am searching for something to emerge from these camps akin to the 1968 “Clean for Gene” movement, where youths of my generation trimmed their hair, shaved their beards (if male, of course), dressed up neatly, and stormed into New Hampshire to help Eugene McCarthy challenge LBJ for the Democratic nomination. Best I can tell, New Hampshire is fairly quiet and safe for GOP candidates.  To be honest I’ve stopped reading the many, many stories and columns that continue to come out of this because they are empty at their core. Yes, many people have been hurt by this country’s financial system and they are appropriately angry. Yes, many in Wall Street deserve a public flogging (see Joe Nocera’s column, Nov. 1). But unless and until this anger is channeled into something that catalyzes a policy debate, it is not particularly newsworthy.  Readers who wish to add their two cents may post a comment below or e-mail me at public@nytimes.com. The subject line of the e-mail should read: “Readers Point the Way: OWS”
The public editor asks readers what they would like to see from The Times in its future Occupy Wall Street coverage.