WASHINGTON is full of guys (and yes, the type is more male than female) who are an important part of the media food chain, yet who themselves are rarely written about. These are the obsessive single-issue experts, usually allying encyclopedic knowledge of a narrow issue with some kind of advocacy. These guys are the desperate reporter’s best friend. When the reporter is unfortunate enough to be assigned a story on, say, the Law of the Sea Treaty, there will be a guy who knows everything the reporter will need to do the story. Better still, he will be delighted to provide the reporter with his home phone number, e-mail, fax, cell number, and a beeper in case you need to interrupt him during dinner or the symphony so he can do what he loves best: discourse on the flaws of the treaty for as long as the reporter will listen.
If you’re an editor like me, the relationship is slightly more complicated. You’re more likely to be on the receiving end of calls from the expert, who will try to persuade you that the perfect complement to the story you did yesterday quoting him on the Law of the Sea Treaty would be another story tomorrow on aspects of the treaty that were neglected in the first article. Your idea of the optimum frequency of coverage of his subject is likelier to be on the order of once every other year.
