Um, that should have read ...

"does NOT guarantee that one actually has anything worthwhile to say"

The final requirement is to talk on subjects that are popular with the public and present old information in a new format. This is normally preceded by "it has been shown that..." but what is ommitted is that this was true in 1960 but not today.

This is then published widely as new without any requirement for accountability, but because of the topic, the intellectual then gets labelled as an expert, and paid to present on the topic.

Popular subjects for this tactic are nuclear power and genetically modified food, and climate change is a close third.

the pseudo intellectuals think it's christmas, just look at that response !

I'm not intellectual enough to decide whether someone expressing an opinion is an intellectual or a wank.er.

But I'm realistic enough to know real intellectuals would reject labels.

Wank.rs wouldn't.

some famous character once said "intellectuals are largely ineffectuals". Anyone know who it was ? Whoever he was certainly had a firmer grasp on reality than himself.

I think a public intellectual should be visionary, wise, and of course must have nous and not be a slave to political correctness. This takes courage. In these times this is not easy. But I do think Stephen Crittenden should come out of his closet. Tanveer Ahmed could also be a contender.

Regulation by the government - no thanks.