In order to convince, one must know which arguments are most suitable for the specific situation. But even if you think you know how others will react to your arguments, you may be wrong. Therefore, the purpose of this paper is to find out a way of examining to what extent informative text take account to the subjective views of their addressees. The theoretical framework is Blitzer's theory of the rhetorical situation, pragmatic theory of speech acts and their presuppositions, Burk´s theory of consubstantiality and phenomenographic theory of subjective perceptions. Methodologically, phenomenography has also been used as a guideline for selecting informants, collecting data and processing the interviews. The material analyzed consists interviews with four persons suffering from psoriasis, a brochure addressed to an unspecified audience with the same problem plus an interview with a spokesperson for the Swedish Psoriasis Association. The analysis reveals a clear difference in certain important respects between the subjective views of the intended reader and the implied addressees of the text, i.e. a lack of consubstantiality between sender and receiver. This points to a rhetorical problem when addressing an unknown audience without exploring their specific perceptions of concepts related to the transmitted information, a problem which may be grasped and perhaps to some extent even solved by applying a method similar to the one used in this study.