It is claimed that oral communication is more effective than written communication. I strongly agree with this statement, as vocal means encompass some exclusive features, such as non-linguistic cues, prompt feedback, and time savings, that other one is deprived of them.
Face-to-face communication is not only about sending your intended messages, but also about informing the listener of both priority and importance of your messages by applying appropriate movement cues. For instance, the listener assures the speaker that he/she appreciates the urgency of the task by waving his/her head downward. In addition, the communicator can take advantage of bodily cues, too. For example, the most dominant point of a chunk of instructions can be highlighted by increasing the volume of the relevant part in the speech, which is not available in written communication.
Moreover, there is always the possibility of misinterpretation by the listener, when the listener does not get the point successfully. In order to avoid these flaws, the communicator can get feedback from the peers consistently to clarify instantly any ambiguous and vague matters. Due to real-time interactions, the workflow is improved remarkably in different environments like workplaces, schools, and universities; the audiences need not to be worry about how precise they catch the object of their superior on and they just accomplish assigned tasks confidently. On the other hand, receiving feedback and making necessary revisions demands a timely long procedure in conventional written correspondences.
In conclusion, there is an assertion which expresses the excellence of oral means over written communication. I radically agree with this statement, because oral communication has some unique characteristics like bodily cues, immediate feedback and time-efficient corrections.