I was just thinking today…Every rhetoric and speech class stresses the importance to ‘consider your audience’. I was reminded of this becuase I have noticed a number of blogs out there that regularly produce impossibly huge posts. They figure they have to cover every possible audience (the global internet audience I guess) while many others have short entries that contain many more generalizations because they understand their audience is familiar with and agrees with many of the premises in the entry. I am struggling to decide which is the better method. I assume much of the time I can make generalizations because of who my audience is, but at the same time I am sure that many will dismiss much of what I am arguing for because I haven’t said enough to back it up. Should I forget those people and stick to my generaliztions or try to post more in depth posts? I suppose I am asking this question because I get tired of discussions where due to lack of clarity, I end up ‘arguing’ with someone until we realize that we actually agree and we just wasted a bunch of time typing away at a computer. Suggestions?

Advertisements