UX Journey

In her insightful essay, Jill Swenson highlights a crucial yet frequently overlooked difference in writing: the distinction between writing for readers and writing for listeners. Any writer who ever reads aloud, speaks into a microphone, or gives their work in person can benefit from her knowledge.

The Core Distinction: Eye vs. Ear

Swenson first outlines the distinction clearly. We appeal to the intellect when we write for print because it is logical, linear, and visual. The reader is able to stop, reread, and consider. However, the objective changes when we create material for an audience that will be able to hear our words.

Our goal is to elicit experience, emotion, and feeling, not simply to communicate concepts. This difference is important. It affects our sentence construction, word selection, and overall message organization; it’s more than simply a stylistic adjustment.

Key Principles: Swenson’s ABCs

Among her most significant practical recommendations is the use of subject-verb-object structures and the avoidance of overly complicated clauses. Repetition and alliteration would be another, since spoken repetition helps readers “lock in” meaning while redundancy is boring on the page. The last piece of sensible advice from Swenson is to refrain from going into too much specifics. When there are too many details, a listener may become confused. Unlike print, where details add richness, it can become noise in conversation, according to Swenson.

Broader Implications: Beyond Author Events

There are numerous situations when writing for the ear is essential, according to Swenson, including sermons, lectures, storytelling, podcasts, radio programs, and even PowerPoint presentations. However, the ramifications extend beyond the realm of leadership and commerce. By using Swenson’s concepts in their writing, presenters, thought leaders, and executives may make their oral communication more memorable and persuasive.

In education, there are implications as well. Because their language will be more organic, educators or teachers who create lectures with the ear in mind will be able to maintain students’ attention for a longer period of time. Additionally, media has these implications. Podcasters, radio presenters, and storytellers gain a lot from this since their writing now focuses on the audience rather than just the words.

Critical Reflection: Why Swenson’s Advice Is Especially Timely

The ability to write for the ear is now more important than ever in a world where audio material is thriving, including live video, podcasts, audiobooks, and virtual speaking engagements. A great opportunity is missed by writers who only consider the printed page: the chance to influence how their message is received. Swenson’s guidance serves as a link between the traditional world of writing (books, print) and the vibrant world of oral performance. Her essay urges authors to be adaptable and versatile, reminding them that the most effective communicators are those who can express their ideas effectively, whether through the eye or the ear.