I found it interesting that the author(s) chose to separate the readers into so many different audiences. I completely agree with the description of the primary audience, and think that this is often the most important audience to identify. These are the people who will be reading the document the most and have the most influence on the way the document should be written. While I don’t disagree with the definitions of the other audiences, I think the reading makes the distinction between these audiences too clear. In the little technical writing experience I have, these audiences often overlap, not only in their function, but in what they look for or need from the writing. I think this would have been important to include, because it might be difficult to find something different that each audience is looking at in the writing to fill in the chart.
The reading really made me think about the different contexts. In previous writing classes, we’ve talked about the differences in physical context, e.g. writing for a book versus writing for something online. I had never given much thought to the economic or political context of my writing. I’m a little uncertain that economic and political issues would have bearing on all technical writing, but I can see how these would be incredibly important to consider if the audience you’re writing for is part of a certain socioeconomic class or political ideology.
The ethical context, like the physical one, often seems to come up in writing classes. In addition to the questions the reading asks regarding the context, we’ve often talked about presenting information in an ethical manner. You can often write something that’s entirely true, but the way you write it or the context in which you include something might imply certain things that aren’t true. And at times, an employer might specifically request that you do this (e.g. in a PR situation), which presents another ethical dilemma for the writer. It’s not necessarily about what you write, but how you write it.
Response
Personally, I think the idea of writing for ethics, politics, and etcetera is a double-edged sword. On one hand in keeping these in mind for your entire audience may make a writing piece more readable or appealing but on the other hand it may detract from your writing style or in some cases, keep you from trying to say what you really want or need to say. It obviously depends on your specific situation and the extent to which you do it, but I think that sometimes it is appropriate to stick out and be a little more edgy with your writing.
Shane
Response
I agree with you, Shane. There are certain times when it is appropriate, and perhaps even useful, to be edgy (I think being edgy can be a great way to make a point, as well as draw attention to your writing). At the same time, I think it's important to make sure that the context and audience of the situation are right for edgy writing. It could be easy to offend an entire audience and have them ignore everything you're saying (rendering your writing useless) by incorrectly identifying the ethical context, political context, etc. of the rhetorical situation in which you're writing.
Kristin
Response
So I agree that you don't want to over-sensor your writing, but I think you have to make that distinction between expression and communication (although they can and do overlap).
Thomas
Instructor Feedback
This is a great conversation! I appreciate that you are all aware of the ambiguities that are always present in any writing situation. Understanding those ambiguities will hopefully translate into your ability to more productively negotiate them. Very rarely do we find clear-cut answers; the best we can do is manage the confusion.