Months after the “Occupy Wall Street” first assembled in New York and spread to become a global phenomenon, the movement remains a puzzle to many outsiders.  In Letters to the Editor and television interviews, many Americans express their cluelessness about the movement’s purpose and goals.

Listen and you’ll hear many in the over-30 generations ask the same questions again and again. “How can they be a movement without a leader?”  “Why can’t they issue a united statement that clarifies what they want?”  “How can they speak as individuals and expect anyone to understand their cause?”

Somehow, the “Occupy” movement continues to grow because so many younger people do get it.  So obviously, its message is getting through to a critical audience.  Then, why is there such a generational divide and what does this say about the future of mass communication?

The answer is quite simple.  Social media have changed the way a new generation deals with information, as well as its perceptions of relevance.

For those of us still old enough to rely on traditional media, we are accustomed to a “theatrical” form of communication.  Our media present to us and we receive.  There is limited opportunity for dialogue between presenters and audience.  So we need spokespersons, position papers and precise definitions that enhance our understanding.

For those who receive their information from the Internet, social media provide opportunities for dialogue.  News and opinions are presented and lead to online conversation.  Therefore, there is less dependence on the talking heads and staged news conferences that fuel the traditional media.

As a result of this dynamic, those involved in a social media dialogue are in tune with one another, but those outside their “conversations” may not understand.  This type of insular communication can create movements, but often can fail to persuade the masses.

Any movement seeking to strengthen its position must be able to reach out to the general populace and convince others of its merits.  Yet the need for dialogue and discussion remains a critical component of promoting acceptance.

Perhaps the next major advancement in digital media will find a solution to these apparently opposing objectives, but until that happens, a healthy mix of traditional and new media remains the best recipe for effective communication and expressive dialogue.

By David Stiefel