Communication is experience, of a sort.
(Communication is Not about knowledge; communication is Not about the transmission of 'information' from one person to another. That can only be done by direct knowing, by Primary Thinking.)
First - it is the experience of the one doing the communication; for instance, the writer. Secondly it is experience for those who engage with a communication - such as the reader.
Communication is much like a relationship: there is one side and another side. Intentions on one side is part of it; then, whether the communication is recognised, in what way recognised, whether acknowledged, whether made a basis for other and reciprocal relationships &c. Much like the range of possibilities of a friendship.
Somebody writes. That is the first experience (it may go no further, but experience is why we live) - and the experience includes whatever and everything that goes-into that writing.
Another person comes-across the writing; perhaps passively, or from seeking; and reads... Perhaps it affects him? Then, there are possibilities in how is it received, how understood, what affect that has, what actions are consequent... (this being a joint act: what went-into the writing and what comes-out - but not directly causal or constrained).
So the life of a writier (qua writer) is primarily the life of writing; and the question is ask is whether that life is Good? Is the experience of writing Good?
The life of a reader (qua reader - because all writers are also readers) is a life of experience from reading - that is, of experience as such.
The questions to ask of writing and reading - i.e. the question to ask of any communication - are the same as for any other kind of experience; e.g. friendship.
(For instance, is it - and if so where is it - Good, Deep, Free and so forth.)
Conventional wisdom has it wrong. Our communication is a matter of us providing other-people with experiences. Our responsibility is to provide them with Good and valuable experiences. But it is not to transmit knowledge, concepts or the like - because communication cannot achieve this
More exactly, we can never know whether communication has trasmitted knowledge, concepts or anything else. Communication is disconnected, indirect, multi-step, interpretational and so on and so forth - as a way of transmitting truth it is hope-less...
It is - in contrast - by our thinking (our thinking of the real self) that we may directly share in knowledge; and by our thinking that we make and simultaneously shape reality (and that reality is permanent and universal - including universally accessible).
In sum; it is Thinking (i.e. primary thinking) that actually does what most poeple suppose communication does; and communication really does something altogether very different.
(One implication is that writing is never creative - communication in general is not creative; but thinking may be.)