Who is Arthur Brisbane?

A couple of months ago, I wrote about the nascent Occupy Wall Street movement citing The New York Times coverage of the protest that almost didn't happen. Since then I have read much, spoken with occupiers and people whom I call “Occupy who not occupy” (of which I am one). I have engaged many in conversation about what the point of the movement is, what is isn't, and  why we should care.

I just read Arthur Brisbane's article Who is Occupy Wall Street? and have had my crucial conjecture confirmed: Occupy does not conform to the conventional framework of modern journalism and will continue to defy the ability of the press to speak coherently about it.

Fortunately, answering my title question is easy as Mr. Brisbane has already done it for me. According to his trade biography, he acts in the role of editorial ombudsman at The New York Times and his credentials and work are formidable. Unfortunately, he has fallen into the trap of attempting to coerce the story into a traditional narrative and in his professional role so guide the work of other journalists. To continue this course does a disservice to the movement and to journalism and I hope to show Mr. Brisbane that there is a more useful way to proceed.