Audience studies does not study text, but rather qualifies and quantifies the audience as the mirror (or sponge) of the text. When you consider that every breathing human brings a unique perspective into that audience, it gives the “mirror” too many facets to measure.

Furthermore, while each individual’s context is different (and hence their interpretation/reaction/consumption of the text), each individual reaction will differ depending on time of day, mood, immediate circumstances. At different points in time, the same individual will have different responses.

While in reality, it makes sense for an orator to speak directly to a specific known audience, I think that in theory, trying to preform rhetoric and rhetorical situation to a fictionalized audience will result in inevitably flawed communication.

It makes more sense to study text directly than to study the audience. Why create such an intrinsically subjective field of study?