Chapter three of Technical Communications Today explains the many different audiences that a writer has and how to address each through charts, tables, and examples of documents used for two different readers.
I especially liked the examples provided of the technical documents used to illustrate the different readers. I have noticed this when reading directions that explain an emergency procedure, such as in a lab or work environment. They are typically large, easy to read, and have pictures to make a process easier to carry out during an emergency when a persons mind is other places. On the other hand, while dealing with professionals, much like the West Nile Virus flyer in the reading, there is much more attention paid to detail and technical terms.
I also connected with the statement that readers are “raiders” for information. Many times I have gone to find technical information online or though books only to find them far too detailed and complex for my understanding; a perfect example of a reader not considered by the author. The charts and tables presented seemed to alleviating this problem by identifying the different types of readers and their needs, values, and attitudes. Personally I found during the reading that I would benefit from completing the charts and tables as somewhat of a checklist when I finished my writing. I find ideas flow better if I simply start writing, rather than trying to come up with a plan. I could certainly see myself glancing over parts of this chapter before writing to keep these ideas in my head, and then coming back and making sure I have accounted for all the details.
The section on global communication was also very informative. I personally know next to nothing about other cultures and although it is always stresses as important, no one has ever expanded on it in a meaningful way. I would not consider this all inclusive information but it is a very good start. I think something that would have been useful to touch on would be how language affects how people view things. People that speak different languages view the world very differently and I think this should also be something to consider when communicating across cultures.
Reply
Although your opening statement outlines the types of reader’s that you should be concerned with, I have to disagree with the strict interpretation, that chapter 3 of the source text explains how to address each individually. I view it, perhaps incorrectly, as offering forth various types of readers and leaving the analysis up to the author. I do agree fully with your review of the source text’s statement regarding “readers and their raid for information” (TCT). I find too often that documents are cluttered and filled with excessive wording that is not only unnecessary but proves to be a burden in searching for the information we care to read. Also, I feel you are correct in stating that language affects how people view things and that this should have been covered in more detail in the source text.
Reading Response - Week 1
As I read through different people's reading responses I definitely find that each one usually points out something rather obvious that I haven't ever given thought to before. You are absolutely right about how emergency information posted on walls is usually very easy to read, for obvious reasons. However, it makes no sense that writers don't take the same approach with more complex items that you talked about in your third paragraph.
I can think of several instances when I too was searching for technical information online or through books and found myself trying to sift through very complex information about something that should be simple. I wonder if it is that the author is not considering the reader while they are writing it or if they are just more concerned about the content of the documentation.
Reading Response 1
I agree with both of you about the complexity of way too many books and other writings. In my research papers, it is often necessary to include background information so that the average reader knows what the paper is talking about. Generally, this information is obtained from other papers and then cited in the current one. However, when trying to find sources of this background information I very frequently come across papers that appear promising, but end up becoming an impossible mess of information that is impossible to follow. Because of this, only readers on the same knowledge level as the writer can understand the paper. When attempting to write background information on topics that I am less familiar with, it becomes very time consuming to “raid” through all of this information to find what I am actually looking for. This makes me go back and look at what I have already written and make sure that my writing is not as confusing and that someone else in my position would be able to understand what I have written. It is easier to keep my potential readers in mind when I am experiencing the same difficulties that they could potentially experience when reading my paper.
Raiders in writing
I appreciated the way you talked about raiders in your response. I am wondering if the technical writing you read online was designed to be raided. I mean that maybe that author was forcing you to read more than you intended by writing the way he or she did. I'm wondering if you think there is a place for that type of writing style or should everyone try to write according to the guidelines of techinical writing. I personally wish everyone wrote with bullet points and graphs, but the more time I have spent around universities, it seems that there are people who like to write in long blocks of text and bury the main thought of the paper so we have to search for it. Is that an effective way to write for some people or are they just clinging to the way people used to write?
Mike Sheridan
Respose
You addressed many points from the chapter. One was that readers tend to be raiders of information, and another was how different cultures should be catered to differently, at least when it comes to writing. I think that these points coincide more than we readers might think. Each culture values specific information differently, and if you apply the idea that readers are raiders, than different cultures produce different raiders. I definitely believe myself to be a raider of basic content, I could care less about detail and historic background. Would you consider me to be a creature of my culture?