When I read it I couldn’t help thinking, "I already know that!" But if I'm honest with myself, I know most of the time I don't think that way when I'm writing. I’m usually so concerned with getting my point across that I even think about how the audience will take what I have to say, or if readers have even the slightest bit of interest in – or capability of – understanding my thought process.
Thinking back, the only time I put recently into an honest effort at considering my target audience was last week. I submitted a request for reimbursement of moving expenses from my company after my move out to Washington. Of course, I had a vested interest in trying to convince whoever will be reviewing my request; I wanted to make sure I get as much money back as I can.
But this week's reading assignment reminded me that every piece of writing can be treated the same way, and most would probably improve. That includes this blog. So with that in mind, I’d like to take a crack at identifying the different levels of readership for this blog assignment.
A ranking of this post's audience depends on assumptions about its purpose, so I’ll just pretend I’m doing writing this in order to get credit for the reading response 1 assignment. Supposing that were the case:
- My instructor, Mr. Jeremy Tirrell, would be my primary reader. (I hope you find my post satisfactory.)
- The secondary reader is a little more difficult to pick out, but I’d say the other instructor, Mr. Nathaniel Rivers, would be a good candidate. (As my instructor's co-instructor, for all I know you and he might consult one another on credit and grading decisions.)
- That would make the rest of the students in this class a potential tertiary audience. (My goal of getting credit for the assignment doesn't really depend on you. But you may be looking at my blog as a benchmark for comparison. Or perhaps you are "raiding" my post for something to respond to meet the comment quota.)
- I’m not sure about gateway reader, so for now I’ll say I would have to be my own gateway reader since I revised and re-revised this entry for about an hour before posting it.
That breakdown seems pretty good to me, but I'm sure there are better interpretations out there – maybe some more abstract and entertaining. If anyone wants to share another interpretation I'd be happy to read it (seriously, you have to post five comments anyway).
Response
In response to your first paragraph I feel the same way about everything you said. When I’m writing something I know I should be paying more attention to what I’m saying in order to convey the right message, but a lot of the time that doesn’t happen. Most of the time I will start writing and the first few paragraphs (or sentences in short writings) will be on point and about the right things. Then after that I normally start losing things to say that are on topic so I start to use random “gap filling” material that may have little to do with what the reader is expecting me to talk about. That is why technical writing can be tricky. You know what you need to be writing about, and even if you know your audience well, it can still be tricky to turn your thoughts into writing that the reader can interpret the way you do.
Bobby
Response
Also in response to your first paragraph, I would contend that it's okay in a first draft to only be concerned with making your point and getting your ideas out there. Yes, you needs to consider your audience, but writing IS a process, and in my own experience writing, considering your audience doesn't always have to be the first step. I think it's important to start writing with an idea in mind of who your audience is and what they need or want, particularly in technical writing, but I know that personally, I can find myself with a writing block if I spend too much time worrying about how to say what I want to say. I've found that my writing gets a lot farther a lot faster if I just think about my audience, start writing, and then KEEP writing. You can always go back to what you wrote originally and make revisions to it that make it more audience-appropriate or cut the ideas that don't necessarily fit the needs or requirements of your audience.
Kristin
Response
I also agree with what you are saying Kristin. It is much easier to get your general idea and start writing than it is to sit there and ponder about what you’re going to say. Like you said if you worry about all the finite details too much it is very easy to get a mental block and not have the slightest clue to what you want to say. There is a fine line in technical writing between over thinking something and saying exactly what needs to be said. I think that is one of the main ideas in this class and the readings we do. To make us understand what that line is and know how to reach it.
Bobby
Reply
Response
I agree with the thoughts here where your audience isn’t necessarily your first step. I think when you are focusing on writing technical papers it is important to think about what your focus for writing is. I think you could easily get carried away with focusing on your audience and possibly what they may want to hear. You could possibly miss some key points that you could have made. I like the thought of just starting to write and then later adding or revising to focus on your audience more. I agree that this method could help you to avoid the dreaded writer’s block.
-Chris
Response
Your third paragraph brings up an interesting point about the audience. Before writing a letter to recoup moving expenses you knew that you must persuade the audience (your company) so you could get your money. The whole point of the letter was to persuade someone and perhaps made you focus on the audience more than ever. Maybe the reason most people focus more on what they have to say and not who they are saying it to is because they aren’t worried about getting something in return. Their focus is simply to say what they want to and be content with it, not on how the audience might react or feel.
Writing is an athletic event?
This is a very good conversation. I'm hesitant to derail it. I will add that Nathaniel and I don't have concrete answers to these questions that are uniformly true. For example, the question of when to consider your audience will be relative to your own workflow and the specific document you are producing. Should you sit down and think who you are speaking to and then write from that mindset, or should you put down your content as neutrally as you can manage and then revise it to suit different audiences? (Thomas's experience with a reimbursement request reveals that some documents really seem to encourage putting the audience's expectations first, regardless of our conventional writing practices.) The heuristics in our readings are convenient scaffolds, but of course writing is not a formula; it is a practice. This means that it is closer to something like an athletic event. (Indeed, classical oratory was practiced in gymnasiums with other sports, and a musician played to keep all athletes on rhythm.) You can learn moves and practice them, but each challenge is going to be different, so each scenario is going to be unique.
One of the central things to take away from this course is that all communication opportunities are situated. This means that their aspects are specific to one occasion (although, of course, some things may appear in other situations). Our job as authors/speakers/designers is to analyze the needs of the situation, which includes the expectations of different audiences, and respond accordingly. In this course, we will show you moves and give you opportunities to scrimmage.
And yes, Nathaniel and I do confer about almost all aspects of the course, so I think Thomas's identification of the secondary audience is very good. For a gatekeeper audience, you might think about school administrators that determine if a post is offensive or otherwise unsuitable to be seen by the primary, secondary, and tertiary audiences. Heck, even the course website might be a gatekeeper audience, because it will bounce your post back if you don't follow the rules (such as putting in a Subject). That's what gatekeepers do; they are like walls the message has to get over before it can reach any of its audiences. Gatekeepers will be very important in our Employment Project, because before a potential primary audience (such as a supervisor) sees your documents, they will almost certainly have to go through a gatekeeper (such as an HR employee).
Artificial Gatekeeping Intellegence
Maybe, if writing/blogging is a form of self-discovery, I am the primary reader. Those who leave comments could be secondary readers who aid in my self discovery by commenting on my thoughts. Those who read and don't comment could be tertiary, since they would observing for who knows what reason, but not participating. That could make the instructors gatekeepers who give parameters that guide the self discovery. Or maybe that's all crazy. But seriously, think about it. As long as we are talking about classical times, I there there is a classical philosophical discussion about writing as discovery, though I could be completely off-base.