If a public intellectual is one who (amongst other things) espouses critical thinking, then I think it would be safe to classify Oprah as the World's Top Anti-Intellectual, and Master of Woo.

To Muddy:
There is a moot point about listing top engineers/scientists on this short list. Somehow, I tend to think this list belongs to great thinkers rather than great practitioners.

Her show has become a reality show. She just follows the public flow to score points. She is a smart woman alright, but an intellectual, maybe not.

Oprah Winfrey? An intellectual?

The title of Mr. Young's OpEd immediately raised suspicions.

Having the name "Oprah" (Winfrey) and the word "intellectual" in the same sentence is undoubtedly oxymoronic.

Well I guess someone here should try to defend Oprah Winfrey. I'm probably not the best one since I try to avoid her. Their is an earnestness and seriousness in some of what Oprah does that differentiates herself from people like Paris and Britney. Her book club has improved the sales of many authors. While from what I gather her tastes may be more middlebrow than highbrow, with selections such as "East of Eden" she does seem to be trying to raise the tastes of the masses.
The same earnestness is also there in some of her film projects such as "The Great Debaters". In addition their was the media attention when she endorsed Barack Obama. Such attention focused on the idea that her endorsement could have serious impact. I do not recall anyone arguing the same about his other celebrity endorsments. Such attention implies that Oprah is not merely a distraction but has important influence on the intellectual lives of her viewers.
The term public intellectual seems so ill-defined that it is ridiculous. What is an intellectual and what is the difference between a public and a private one? Oprah's cachet of intellectual influence may soley be a carryover from her book club. I suspect though that more people are influenced intellectually by her than are influenced by most of the people on "Prospect"'s list. While quality of ideas is something to consider how much impact should quality have? The term public intellectual seems to imply influence on the public. Should said public be the masses or a small group of intellectuals. It may just be my dislike of the term public intellectual but I see no problem with putting Oprah on such a list. I'm not sure that I would though, I'm to ill-informed.

The author's defense of Operah Winfrey being on the list is utterly shallow and ridiculous. According to the logic espoused by the author, anyone who has the capability to influence public opinion deserve to be on the list of public intellectuals. Why not add Paris Hilton and Brittany Spears to the list? Why not all the publishers? Furthermore, there is no consistent theme in the post as if the author just sat down to write without any purpose other than his displeasure at certain names on the list.

One important litmus and empirical test, among others, to judge who is an intellectual and who is not could be to measure how often a particular person has been right in making predictions or has proposed testable and measurable predictions.

Given the current fad for producing top ten, top twenty, top hundred lists on all sorts of topics, some amount of robust empirics, preferably grounded in an underlying theory, is a useful reality device. The lists try to give the impression of precision, accuracy and objectivity by being set up as numbered lists. It is high time that the consistency and relevance of these lists was subjected to a strict scrutiny so that they can be more useful than exercises in mere vanity for individuals, institutions and countries.

Are Top Engineers and Scientists listed in top 100 Intelectuals? If not, the list isn't worth squat, and there are several other areas of specialization which should be included, though I not sure how Oprah rates that high. What area of knowledge does she lead the advancement of?