Response to a lecture: Old vs. New

We had a long discussion in class about looking at texts (and writing texts) in a new style vs. an old style. As a communication major, I often have to study theories, past and present, on how media affect people. I saw a lot of similarities in this lecture, which is based on something I know little about, to things I know about the communication field.
Media critics, in the early days of television, had a theory called the hypodermic needle theory. According to this theory, media directly influenced audiences. Once the message was shown, it was accepted and perceived as truth. Of course, this theory is no longer accepted but it lays on the same lines as old texts that didn't give the reader any credit.
What really stands out about the authors we have read in this class is that they give their readers the benefit of the doubt. They trust people to have the intelligence to differentiate between true and false, right and wrong, and fantasy and reality. Based on this assumption, the writer develops a relationship with the reader. There are things that can't be put into words but they set the stage and put the reader down their path of thought. They believe that their audience has enough humanity to follow their line of emotion, whether they agree or not. In "Life in the Iron-Mills," a recurring emotion that I feel is put on the reader is guilt. In Wheatley's poems, she leads the readers to understanding and empathy.
Trusting the reader to comprehend the writings and be human enough to be capable of emotion is the most distinct reason I can find why these texts will be around for a long time and treasured as classics.