Considering Public Intellectuals

In considering public intellectuals for our upcoming midterm project, I can't help but wonder how to evaluate individuals who have a public voice; how do you draw the line between a popular blog, and a bohemian public intellectual?

While the reading we had assigned to us discusses the potential new "sub-categories" of public intellectuals, and perhaps their evolution from how they were previously defined, it is not very clear on how to make a decision whether or not a specific individual is a public intellectual or not. It concerned itself mostly with talking about the group as a whole, or rather as an abstract idea.

For example Steve Pavlina runs a blog which is followed by many people, citing over 2 million visits per month. He certainly has (in at least some form) the attentive public. That being said, his articles do not address the issues most people would consider public policy. His focus on personal development lends itself to many narratives, and although he references technical subjects such as psychology, quantum physics, and more with common vernacular, he does so in order to make points about the human condition, or abstract ideas of growth. Does this choice of topic mean he does not shape the public opinion and therefore is not a public intellectual? Also, by the definition on page one, a public intellectual is one who is "listened to be important sectors of the public". How to determine which sectors of the public a blogger is listened to is rather difficult, let alone deciding their importance.

This being said, he is certainly "broadly educated" and also "can speak on a myriad of topics". In addition, he is not affiliated with any academic organization, and has made it clear he is unafraid to publish opinions which are likely to (or even are designed to) offend some of the public: such as his post on 10 Reasons Not to Get a Job, or on Polyarmory. So he has certainly not succumb to pressures of any one institution.

So the real question boils down to: Does the topics on which an individual writes affect their status as a Public Intellectual? PI's are defined by writing on a wide range of topics, how that is not a specific measure of a person's writing. How can one decide what is a wide enough range? How can one decide what topics are considered to be in the public interest?

For now I leave these questions unanswered, however my decision on this topic will certainly be forthcoming.