Week 8

Option A

One of the most valuable takeaways I’ve gained this semester about professional digital communication is how much style and voice matter in shaping credibility, clarity, and professionalism. Before this class, I tended to think of digital communication as mostly about choosing the right platform: email, chat, Zoom, or a shared document. What I’ve come to realize through our discussions, readings, and assignments ( and presentations) is that the style of communication (sentence structure, tone, and voice) has a direct effect on how professional rhetoric is understood today.

Anderson’s Technical Communication, especially Chapter 10 on style, made this point clear for me. The chapter explains that professionals should write in a style that is clear, concise, and reader-centered, avoiding unnecessary complexity. That may sound simple, but when I compare it to real-world examples, I see how subtle choices in communication shape power, professionalism, and relationships.

For instance, in my civilian employment, judicial communication, when judges issue decisions, they write/say, “This court finds…” rather than “I find…” At first glance, that may seem like just a formality, but it reflects a deliberate stylistic choice. By using the institutional voice rather than the personal one, the judge shifts the authority of the decision away from an individual and onto the judicial system itself. This creates distance, objectivity, and formality. Anderson points out that one way to adjust style is by carefully choosing sentence structures and subjects, and in this example, we see exactly that: the subject is not the judge but the court. In digital communication today, professionals make similar rhetorical choices, whether they realize it or not. For example, when an organization posts, “Our team recommends…” instead of “I recommend…,” it conveys a collective authority and strengthens the perception of professionalism.

This idea of voice in professional communication also connects to parenting styles. Just as parents may communicate with their children in different voices, authoritative, permissive, or authoritarian, professionals adjust their voice in digital spaces depending on their purpose and audience. An overly strict “authoritarian” tone in an email might sound cold or dismissive, while an overly permissive one might sound unprofessional or vague. An authoritative yet respectful voice strikes a balance: it shows professionalism while still respecting the recipient. Anderson reminds us that sentence structure and word choice are tools for achieving this balance, and digital communication gives us endless opportunities to practice it.

Personally, this realization has changed how I approach emails and online discussions at work and in future courses.. Now I see how important it is to shape sentences so that they are reader-centered.

Digital communication has also raised the stakes because messages are permanent, searchable, and often shared beyond their original audience. In face-to-face conversations, tone can be clarified with body language or follow-up, but in digital communication, the written record stands on its own. That means rhetorical decisions about voice and style matter even more. An email drafted hastily can circulate widely, shaping how others perceive your professionalism and credibility. Similarly, a Teams message might influence a colleague’s trust in your leadership style the same way a parenting “voice” sets the tone for authority at home.

In today’s workplace, the most important effect of digital communication on rhetoric is how it blurs the line between formal and informal communication, making stylistic judgment crucial. Professionals must constantly decide how much formality to bring to each platform. Anderson’s advice on clarity, conciseness, and audience awareness provides a framework for making those choices. For me, the key takeaway is that voice is rhetorical power: just as judges speak through the authority of the court, and parents guide through tone, professionals shape workplace relationships and credibility through stylistic choices in digital communication.

In short, I’ve learned that professional digital communication is not just about getting the message across; it’s about choosing the voice that conveys authority, builds trust, and reflects ethical responsibility while being reader-centered. Whether drafting an email, a report, or even a discussion board post, I now pay more attention to how my choices in sentence structure and tone align with Anderson’s principles, and how they affect my audience. That is the lesson I will carry forward beyond this class.