Readers eveywhere, you are needed!!

Audience addressed and Audience evoked the role if the audience:

This article addresses the audience and claims that there are two ideas of what that could be; according to their esteemed educated colleagues. But the writers of the piece think there is a third way of picturing who writers are and should be writing to/for.
The first is the addressed audience, which means the writer is writing to a specific person or group, i.e. teacher. The idea being the writer writes his product, the reader reads it and then gives feedback and the writer continues the process. The writers of this article claim this technique does not always work because, “No matter how much feedback writers may receive after they have written something, as the compose writers must rely in large part upon their vision of the reader, which they create, as readers do their visions of the writers, according to their own experiences and expectations.” Another apparent downside to addressed audiences is that the reader may “pander” to his readers, which is not the responsibility of the writer. “The central task of the writer then is not to analyze an audience and adapt discourse.” The writer is to give cues as to define the roll of the reader.
The second form of audience is one that is evoked by the writer; this is from Ongs’ theory. His main theory was that speaking and writing are very different and therefore need a different audience. Where a speaker talks he gets immediate response from the audience, a writers does not and therefore has to evoke an audience. The authors of this article have this to say on that subject, “…speaking and writing are, after all, both rhetorical acts.” Simply saying, yes they are different, but not as much as Ong claims. Ong claims the writers invent an audience and then give it a defined roll to play. But some of the hang ups of this theory, the writer has no knowledge of how much knowledge his imaginary readers have. This the authors claim puts a constraint on the reader, not only is the writer expecting a certain amount of knowledge, he may not have imagined enough knowledge for his audience. “Who does not consider the needs and interests of his audience risks loosing them.”
So their solution is to mix the two…in a way. The writer must, “establish the range of potential roles an audience may play.” They must also meet the expectations of their readers. So to explain in a nut shell, the writer must address the needs and expectations of his readers but also evoke needs, interests and knowledge at the risk of loosing them. The writer establishes the range of potential roles an audience can play, but can never forget the needs and expectations.
Life is a balancing game. With any two opposing theories, there is a middle ground which probably makes the most sense. I would have to agree with this article. I only have one thing to add. I this theory of there I feel is still a subconscious one, when we write we write for the skeptics of our essay, but also the teach someone who is not knowledgeable about or issue.