On the face of it journalists for Time magazine are unlikely bedfellows with the Occupy Wall Street (OWS) movement. After all, isn’t one of the beefs of the protesters that the media are part of the problem rather than the cure.

There were widespread and credible accusations of the original demonstrations in New York being ignored by mainstream outlets.

Even when Occupy events are reported, a typical refrain is that those taking part are the usual band of student hotheads and anarcho-punks who are biting the hands that feed them; a kind of knee-jerk reactionary line that gives a lie to the notion of a free press and impartial journalism.

Too often protests only get wide coverage when they turn into a riot, as happened in Rome. The fact that the majority of Occupy protests have been well organised and largely peaceful happenings means they often don’t get reported as fully or fairly as they deserve.

This is where the social media of the internet has come into its own for, as Stephen Gandel writes in his article The Leaders Of A Leaderless Movement,  “the revolution has not only been televised, it has also been tweeted, tumblred and streamed”.  The large numbers who have no faith in the popular press and others who are merely suspect they aren’t getting the whole story, no longer have to depend on tabloid hacks with corporate-sponsored axes to grind.

For any cause to be successful and bring about change, there is a need for radicals who are prepared to man the barricades and camp out in all weathers  as well as a passive backers  who lend moral or financial support but are otherwise more reluctant to take part in direct action.

Time may not be unequivocally supportive of OWS and its offshoots but, as the selection of articles in this slim volume prove, they are at least taking the movement seriously. There will be better and more comprehensive analyses of the movement but these pieces should be welcomed as a demonstration of balanced reporting, a  commodity that is sadly in short supply these days.