Yet that status is still a matter of perception. The way people's ideas are received will largely depend on their position in society. Two individuals may have identical thoughts on a topic, but if only one of them is considered to be an intellectual their words will probably not be accorded the same respect. And this phenomenon can even be observed in situations where the person considered to be an intellectual knows a lot less about the topic than the person who isn't. In many cases, expertise actually seems to impede a person's attempt to be taken seriously.
Expertise is in the details.
But details are not readily translated into public discourse, precisely because it takes expertise to understand their importance. We confront this paradox in political campaigns, where a candidate's experience is only considered strong if she or he can speak effectively in a language that does not presume too much experience. There are exceptions to the pattern described above. Within the United States, for example, there is a longstanding tradition of anti-intellectualism that regards the division of mental labor with suspicion. Yet even within that context, the people asked to speak publicly on matters of concern still tend to be those who are considered to be intellectuals.