...who would therefore have some insight besides what he reads and hears in the news.

If you've ever attended a public governmental meeting, you will realize immediately that the reporter who wrote the article about it was probably at a different meeting than you were. Except that the article reported the same votes on the same questions with the same outcomes on the same date... hmmm...

News articles aren't meeting minutes. The reporter, with the best will in the world, can only pick what appear to be the good parts and report on those, while leaving the rest of the meeting on the editing room floor. Even meeting minutes will not reflect the attitudes of the people at the meeting (whispering, nodding in agreement, etc.). So reading the news or watching news reports aren't adequate to know what's going on at that meeting. And this is only the County Planning Commission.

Now multiply that by Congress and the Senate.

This is why C-SPAN legislative coverage is so important. Still, I haven't the time to "attend" all the debates, even if I taped 'em.

This is also why present and past government funtionaries, and the reporters who actually go to all these meetings and base their reports on their first-hand witnessing, are the authorities. Columnists who fit into either of these categories can be taken seriously, even if one disagrees or doesn't believe them.

Anyone who forms opinion based on speeches produced for the consumption of the average person is truly not an authority. He has no more experience than the average person.

What he does have is a publisher who likes it that he has fans who will buy the paper.

Regards--
Mary Anne