See, I thought it was pretty clear what they wanted. They wanted to express their collective outrage at income inequality, the perception that Wall Street played by a different (and unfair) set of rules than the rest of us, unemployment and destruction of wealth and opportunity directly caused by Wall Street. It was a group of people that were upset at a range of related issues, and I think what the media did was recast and define them as "a single voice" then ran with the narrative that this single voice offered no solution (when it wasn't necessarily even claiming to). I think it's ok and natural to just be pissed at abuses and a system that isn't working fairly. The media failed to describe what they were upset about on the balance, preferring to describe how they didn't know what they wanted. They clearly wanted more equity collectively, and since they were not one monolithic entity as they were cast, different protesters had different ideas on ow to enact it.