Audiobooks do not count as reading! amirite?

you're right! that's why you listen to audio books and don't read them.

by Esipes 4 months ago

When your mama read you little stories to fall asleep to (if she loved you), did you ever say that you read the book that she was reading you?

by jacynthe77 4 months ago

OP's statement is that audiobooks don't count as reading. It's not being snobbish, it's a fact.

by jacynthe77 4 months ago

Yes. Having read a book and the process of reading a book are kinda different concepts.

by Tromphollie 4 months ago

My dad read me my first Harry Potter book and then we read the second together, next year I read the third by myself. I was equally immersed in all of the books and I did consider them equally "read" in my mind. Eventually when I was older and started the whole series again, I considered that as "rereading" the books, even the first one.

by Anonymous 4 months ago

I'm sorry, but literature is not only about the story. It's also about prose, historical context, imagination stimuli. Some of the best books ever written have very mundane stories.

by Anonymous 4 months ago

All of that is telling you the story, it wasn't meant as a literal statement that only the plot matters.

by Thin_Programmer_3060 4 months ago

Pedantic much

by audiejohnston 4 months ago

Doesn't take away from the fact that listening still gives you all of that. Just because they didn't say that, doesn't mean it's not there. Don't need to be pedantic

by Anonymous 4 months ago

While you're at it, you may as well say that you smelled a YouTube video and that you tasted a scented candle.

by Anonymous 4 months ago

I read all my audio books because I don't want to be stupid.

by Individual_Might_855 4 months ago

Logically speaking, reading and listening to an audiobook are two different things, so we can't rope them together as if we can use the two words synonymously. However I do think that the endgame is ultimately the same, which is what matters. You're still gaining the same knowledge, experiencing the same story, either way. So in that way, I think it does count as "reading"

by Anonymous 4 months ago

Has anyone ever tried to equate the two or is this an argument you've created in your head?

by Schneiderwilmer 4 months ago

There is a crazy small number of people who do think this but at that point it's not worth the argument to a tiny portion of the population

by Low_Ambition2491 4 months ago

There's also a small number of people who dismiss audiobooks all together, saying that it doesn't count or it's cheating. So mostly when people say that audiobook is reading, it is in response to those claims.

by Aliabernathy 4 months ago

I think it depends on the context of it being said. If someone asks if everyone has read a specific book so they can discuss the plot I will say I read it. But if people are talking about how reading is a good way to keep your mind sharp I would say that I don't really read as it's not the same.

by Anonymous 4 months ago

Do we really think that it's the eyes picking the words out of the image that makes reading sharpen the brain? I don't see why it should matter to my brain much whether the words came in via the eyes or the ears. If you can point me to science that says otherwise I will happily stand corrected.

by ForwardDeer 4 months ago

I don't know, but I would say that when you read it with your eyes, you have to make the sentence make sense all on your own, whereas when it's read to you, the reader will read it in a way that imparts some of the meaning by their tone and inflections. I think that's why it's mentally easier and more passive.

by Watersemmet 4 months ago

People who read books need a reason to look down on people who listen to books while commuting in traffic for some reason.

by Anonymous 4 months ago

I feel like you're exposing yourself as someone who doesn't understand language. When people say it counts as reading, they are referring to the act of consuming a book. They are not saying that it is literally the same as reading.

by Anonymous 4 months ago

A lot of people mistakenly think it somehow doesn't count as reading, even though you're getting the exact same info.

by audiejohnston 4 months ago

Are we just arguing about what verb to use? "Listen to" a book vs. "reading" it? Or are we arguing that using one's ears to consume story words is somehow less intelligent or makes one less worthy than doing it with the eyes? If so, why do you care how other people choose to do it?

by ForwardDeer 4 months ago

Yes, but it's functionally similar enough to make it meaningless to distinguish in all but the most particular of cases. I can listen to an audiobook and discuss the book just as well as someone who read it with their eyes. It's an elitist distinction. The story made it into my brain via a different pathway but it's otherwise the same. Who cares? (This is directed at OP as much as it's directed at you.)

by ForwardDeer 4 months ago

It's not even debatably an elitist distinction. I listen to audiobooks and read books, but I understand what the word "reading" means so I would never call listening to an audiobook "reading," especially since it's a fact that listening to an audiobook isn't reading. And who cares? Anyone who cares that people use words to mean what they actually mean and not whatever made up thing they want it to mean.

by Anonymous 4 months ago

The logical response there is "Oh, I did the audiobook" because you, in fact, have not read the book. I understand what you mean and I'm sure many people would respond to that question like that even though they're technically incorrect.

by Anonymous 4 months ago

You are correct, and the people arguing with you on this point are (unintentionally) making a separate (and damning) point about the quality of the American education system. To piggyback, reading the words themselves and properly interpreting the information is an entire process engaging several different parts of the brain. Having someone read it to you, means the reader has done the interpretation and decoding of the information for the listener. These are VERY different processes undertaken by the person receiving the information. So, in effect, they are not in fact "getting the same info" Conflating the two shows a lack of reading comprehension, and critical thinking skills

by Consistent_Check_385 4 months ago

Give the valid argument that it doesnt count as reading, ill start ya off elitism isnt a valid argument

by Adept_Profession_800 4 months ago

It's a fact, so I don't need to argue it. Good try, though, troll.

by Anonymous 4 months ago

Its a fact that they're the same rhing actually so no. You're nitt picking and bias, I win bye bye

by Adept_Profession_800 4 months ago

You fundamentally don't understand what the word "fact" or "reading" means. You're welcome to continue making a fool of yourself like this if you want but it won't be in my notifications.

by Anonymous 4 months ago

I suppose cliff notes give you same info, hurr durr.

by Anonymous 4 months ago

LMAO. What a crazy metaphor. An audiobook is word for word the exact same as a book. Cliff notes is in no way the same info.

by audiejohnston 4 months ago

See figure 8

by Anonymous 4 months ago

I think it usually comes up like person A says they've read whatever book, and then person B goes "ohh me too!" because that's just how your brain intuitively responds. Usually, a slight clarification comes like two sentences later.

by Anonymous 4 months ago

Yup absolutely, and I don't think there's anything wrong with audiobooks but if, like me, part of the reason you read is for cognitive health, then audiobooks won't cut it.

by Anonymous 4 months ago

And why is that? Audiobooks can't expand the mind in the same way reading can?? Did you have some studies to point to?

by audiejohnston 4 months ago

I'm guessing actively reading helps the brain retain that information better since listening is more of a passive experience

by blakedickens 4 months ago

I mean, you can pause an audiobook so it's pretty simple to pause to reflect, or go back and listen to another section again, etc. Love reading, but also a big fan of audiobooks. Makes my work commute, chores, etc actually kinda enjoyable. Who doesn't love being read a story? I've never understood the disdain for audiobooks among the purists.

by tfeest 4 months ago

My audible app has a pause and rewind 30 seconds button that I can hit if I need to rehear or think about something. I can absorb it just fine..

by Anonymous 4 months ago

You don't absorb the material as much That's just not true

by Aggressive-Wing-4782 4 months ago

I mean, maybe not 3× speed but I do think it's worth noting that for some people (me included) I can get WAY more out of audiobooks than reading. If I'm reading to study I'll pick the book, but if I'm reading for enjoyment I'm going to shed the extra effort that is actually stringing events together in my mind.

by Anonymous 4 months ago

People skim books, too.

by Anonymous 4 months ago

I object to the use of the term "reading" when it comes to audiobooks, but I also don't gatekeep them as somehow less valid than reading a book.

by Anonymous 4 months ago

I think that's the main issue in why people fight against the distinction. In some ways listening to the audiobook could give a richer experience depending on how good the narrator is.

by Mediocre_Doctor 4 months ago

Count for what? This isn't elementary school where you get a prize for summer reading, it's a thing to do in your down time. I really don't get why reading is treated like a competition.

by Anonymous 4 months ago

People that don't listen to audiobooks absolutely think there should be a badge for being a "real reader". Even though the people I know that are against audiobooks only read a couple books per year, if that.

by audiejohnston 4 months ago

True and it happens at my work. One of the service leader apparently likes reading books so he started this whole book reading crap that all of us have to embrace. Voluntary they say but the amount is bragging they do is intolerable

by Anonymous 4 months ago

How on earth do you think biochem is comparable to Asimov big dawg

by Anonymous 4 months ago

Many humans are competitive about pretty much everything from the moment they wake up -- yes, even about hobbies (which is nuts). They didn't evolve.

by Anonymous 4 months ago

brother we're currently in an anti-intellectualism phase rn, i'm just happy when someone reads or listens to a book at this point

by Paytonweimann 4 months ago

Why would there be an exception if someone has poor vision? What. It's either reading or it isn't. Pick a lane buddy.

by Myriam60 4 months ago

This is the weirdest and most unnecessary type of gatekeeping.

by Queasy_Meaning 4 months ago

you can't give an exception and still have a valid point

by ParsleyApart546 4 months ago

I have found that people who argue that audio books don't count the same as reading physical books don't read either.

by Character-Swim6589 4 months ago

Obviously not

by Character-Swim6589 4 months ago

It's not meant to be taken literallty. If a friend took you out for dinner, handed you a menu and said "get anything" would you also say "uhh I can only get what's listed on the menu.

by Winfield22 4 months ago

When you say you're reading an audiobook, it's a figure of speech. It becomes as such because "I heard the book" sounds off. In the same way that when a blind person says they "See what you mean" they're not speaking in literal terms. I don't know if I've ever heard someone make this claim.

by SpecificLine 4 months ago

It's close enough. Lot of people aren't visual learners and actually absorb the information a lot better hearing it read I'm one of those people

by Anonymous 4 months ago

This, plus the fact that some of these audiobooks have excellent readers that can really bring the story to life more than I can in my own head.

by Specific_Finish 4 months ago

Buddy I've had countless instances where I have to go back and re-read a page or two because my mind drifted and I don't remember a single thing that's happened, even though I've physically read the words. The act of reading can be as active or passive as the act of listening. For a lot of people it's easier to drift off with an audiobook than a physical one, sure, but the act of consuming the information in the book is not appreciably different.

by Anonymous 4 months ago

Reading is for lightweights. I stare literature down until I get the information that I need.

by jayden66 4 months ago

So... You're not able to passively listening to somebody ?

by Anonymous 4 months ago

The number of people in human history who were illiterate dwarfs the number who could read and write. Hearing stories is who we are.

by Sure-Vast 4 months ago

I read this and tried to imagine how many illiterate dwarves there were in history, or how we'd even have that statistic.

by Durgansoledad 4 months ago

Listening to audio books is a great option–but it's literally is a different activity which uses different parts of your brain. It's not worth engaging people who think listening to a book is the same as reading a book.

by FunGroundbreaking 4 months ago

A huge, HUGE amount of literature was written explicitly to be read aloud. Many, many authors dictated/dictate their "writings". Therefore an audio book is often enough a better representation of the intention of the author. which uses different parts of your brain. This is a misconception, of course the part for "ears" or "eyes" are activated in one or the other. But that's only the medium. At a higher cognitive level there is no difference in information retained.

by Alarming_Profit 4 months ago

I would agree that there is convergence during higher level processing. But they are literally different activities with different benefits. Research has shown that reading offers more benefits in terms of comprehension and information retention. I like audiobooks by the way; I think they're an excellent medium and I'm glad they exist. I'm just saying they're not the same, which seems like common sense to me.

by FunGroundbreaking 4 months ago

Its not the same thing but you can still learn the literature which is kind of the point

by BirthdayCultural2590 4 months ago

I mean if one person reads and other listens and they can talk about it afterwards in the same level of details what is ultimately lost. The only real valid complaint I can understand is that narrators can like movie adaptations can narrow elements of text that are fun to discuss different takes on regarding how characters sound or what accents they have.

by Anonymous 4 months ago

I think it's silly to define an activity by whether it requires 100% attention or not

by Eastern_Broccoli7192 4 months ago

That listening to an audiobook isn't reading a book isn't an opinion. It's a fact. Listening to an audiobook is fundamentally listening to someone else read a book out loud.

by Anonymous 4 months ago

Exactly. There's nothing left to argue.

by Anonymous 4 months ago

Sorry, you can totally shut down and only focus on listening to it as well. It's no different than reading a book.

by hershel44 4 months ago

Not the same at all

by Anonymous 4 months ago

You know you are in unpopular opinion. Right?

by Anonymous 4 months ago

You know that doesn't mean people have to suck your dick and agree with you right? A real unpopular opinion means it's unpopular so people won't agree...

by Myriam60 4 months ago

Yes that means I get to say your opinion is lame as hell and I get to figuratively crumple it up and throw it at a wall

by Ill-Effect 4 months ago

It absolutely matters, not because one is better than the other, but because they are fundamentally different experiences. In an audio book the narrators plays a major role in how you perceive the material. It is just an important component of the experience as the material itself. Obviously, that doesn't apply to reading.

by Mediocre_Doctor 4 months ago

Oh man, I've had some terrible audiobook narrators that conveyed entirely the wrong emotion for certain scenes.

by audiejohnston 4 months ago

I mean yeah? I don't think I've heard anyone argue that listening to audio books is reading

by Anonymous 4 months ago

Believe me I can multitask while I read.

by Brionna69 4 months ago

Yeah. You don't read them. You listen to them.

by Far-Apricot-9778 4 months ago

I'm not reading reverse harem paranormal bdsm monster erotica for self improvement

by Anonymous 4 months ago

Follow up point, I read on average 240 books a year. I won't read a book that's less than 200 pages long, most the books I read are 300-800 pages long. I exclusively read erotica. Does that "count" as reading?

by Anonymous 4 months ago

Reading doesn't matter. What matters is taking in good stories.

by Anonymous 4 months ago

It's not reading, but the info sticks better for me

by shannynolan 4 months ago

They aren't the same thing. However, if you are talking about actually digesting it audiobooks are just as demanding, if not more so. It is much easier to have your mind wander while listening to something (especially if you are multitasking) than when reading it.

by Kris96 4 months ago

I prefer audio books to book.. Books. Personally I'm a very fast reader and audiobook forces me to slow down and think about the plot, mystery, and how the story is going

by dickijarrod 4 months ago

what if I'm reading while watching tv? checkmate

by Feestgenoveva 4 months ago

I am a global aphant, meaning I cannot visualise /mentally "hear" / mentally "smell" etc anything. I have come to realise that my love of audio books is not just the convenience - as the books follow me through my day. But also, where I can neither visualise the scenes nor hear the voices, that great narrators are able to bridge some of the gap in giving me different voices to the story. I also struggle to concentrate 100% on anything. I cannot watch TV/ a film without also doing something like a puzzle or playing a game. I actually need to be doing something else to focus on listening to the book. For me, music is irritating to my brain, I have to fast forward any music I hear on TV etc, so I couldn't listen to music whilst reading. I am a bit of an odd duck though.

by OtherGeneral3370 4 months ago

Actively reading via an audiobook activates the same part of the brain as reading on a screen or physical page. This, in turn, is a different part of the brain than what activates when you're listening to music or watching television. So, it's still reading. Hope that helps!

by GooseKey2128 4 months ago

Only in the car or walking. I fall asleep if listening while sitting in a chair

by Old_Spare 4 months ago

Unabridged counts as reading, abridged or dramatized counts as listening to a radio play IMO.

by Anonymous 4 months ago

Name 10 books

by mcculloughestev 4 months ago

Nobody disagrees with you. But when people say they "read" a book, they mean they consumed it somehow, it could be via an audio book. Like, you still "watched" a movie even if you struggle to see. It's not like there's a certain percentage threshold to breach before it "counts,". If you experienced the story, then you read/watched it (because that's what those words mean in context). It's boring tedious pedantry otherwise.

by Anonymous 4 months ago

Yes, that's why it's called an audiobook mate

by Anonymous 4 months ago

Literature started as an oral tradition, reading was just a technological innovation for doing the same thing

by Anonymous 4 months ago

I don't really care tbh. Like yes they're obviously different but if someone listened to the audiobook I'm pretty sure I could still talk to them about the book

by Thin_Programmer_3060 4 months ago

What if you listen to audiobooks while reading the book to maximize retention?

by Artistic_Company 4 months ago

You're gatekeeping reading? lol. So if you listened to an audiobook what do you get out of rereading it? Nothing. Exactly.

by Anonymous 4 months ago

Any method to absorb the story is valid. Why would not reading it matter?

by Anonymous 4 months ago

People actually think multitasking is a thing. They don't understand how the brain works.

by ResolutionNo 4 months ago

I swam several miles this morning. Granted it was a lazy river and I just chilled and floated for several miles while my attention wandered but still!

by Anonymous 4 months ago

OK, but If I've listened to a full unabridged version of a book I'm gonna cross it off my list as read. Fight me.

by Anonymous 4 months ago

What do you mean by "count"? Count for what? What are the implications of this statement?

by Anonymous 4 months ago

I never understood why people care. Somebody says "I read a book" and you be like "NO YOU DIDN'T!!" How does it affect you?

by Anonymous 4 months ago

This is a fact, not an opinion. Listening ≠ Reading

by Anonymous 4 months ago

I reserve audiobook listening to fun fiction books, and physical reading for non fiction or serious/complicated fiction. I just don't remember things as well as when I read them.

by Acceptable-Agency 4 months ago

Agree to a certain extent but being a blind man, it's the only way! It's a good to help maintain focus for prolonged periods of time it's easy to let your mind wonder when listening it's its own skill. But yeah if you are listening to an audio book while doing something else like driving or something that takes focus you ain't paying attention.

by Anonymous 4 months ago

Did someone beat you in your elementary schools read-a-thon using audiobooks?

by Sufficient_Neck_5299 4 months ago

Well I have to commute long on a motorbike. Like 40 minutes back and forth. I can't really read then. So I like audio books for those dead times cause I don't always wanna listen to music. So sorry thats not "real enough" for you Always find it so weird people wanting to gate a hobby or a way of enjoyment off it. People are strange

by Anonymous 4 months ago

Yawn. If it did count maybe you would have an unpopular opinion here. This though? Everyone knows this.

by Independent-Map1553 4 months ago

This a-hole makes up dumb rules but at least he gives exceptions to the blind.

by Anonymous 4 months ago

Didn't read, don't care.

by Anonymous 4 months ago

What about the Illiad? What about the Odyssey? I mean, it's about storytelling, right?

by Routine_Note 4 months ago

Listening to every word of a book, especially when read by the author ffs, is certainly closer to reading the material than watching a movie based on the book with a completely different script and vision.

by Anonymous 4 months ago

Okay, but I listen to music or watch youtube while reading physical books, so does that mean I haven't read them because I was multitasking, despite being able to have in depth discussions with others about the book?

by enricobernhard 4 months ago

Stupid snob argument. I just finished listening to Dungeon Crawler Carl book 7 and can fully discuss the book with someone who physically read it and you would have no idea from what we know of it who did which if you asked for details (unless I started imitating the voice actors delivery).

by Anonymous 4 months ago

So, since I read and knit at the same time, does that not count either? Why do we need to gate keep stories?

by OkEnergy 4 months ago

No, if listening to audiobooks isn't reading because you're not giving it your undivided attention, that's still true for people with bad vision. The question has to be how much attention you're giving it.

by Anonymous 4 months ago

dude when i read anything thats more than 2 sentences long i start day dreaming and have to reread what i've read multiple times i have to pay less attention to an audiobook to get the same amount of information

by Anonymous 4 months ago

Which is why books are great for improving your attention span. Seeing how distracting on something else is not as easy with a written book… Unlike audiobooks.

by Anonymous 4 months ago

You might wanna see a doctor about that. Seriously, that's not good.

by Anonymous 4 months ago

Audiobooks counts as reading. How else are old blind people who are blind because they're old supposed to read? Cant learn braille when your 90(as least not easily)

by Alarmed-Peace-189 4 months ago

Walking to a destination and driving to a destination are the same thing by that logic. The end goal is the same but the process is not.

by Mediocre_Doctor 4 months ago

Technically, sure. I can't possibly imagine ever being up my own ass enough that I feel compelled to talk down to someone who "just" listened to the audiobook though, but I was also born "not a pretentious douche". I -love- books and literature and stories and so much of our human condition is reflected in art, and there's something warm and fuzzy and amazing about a paper book, but what's the point of gatekeeping? What do you get by shooting down someone who's excited about an author because they loved the audiobook?? It's not like they got an abridged version, it's literally the same story word for word (plus or minus an intro/outro by the author or narrator). It's way more direct to the point to answer "yes" if someone asks if you've read a book, because if they're looking to talk about it there's no functional difference.

by tfeest 4 months ago

It is definitely a different thing, it activates different parts of your brain. I like to read fiction and listen to non fiction

by Anonymous 4 months ago

it activates different parts of your brain. Studies show that the info retained is very similar. The part of the brain activation is just for which organ you use, not for the higher brain function dealing with the info you receive.

by Alarming_Profit 4 months ago

Huh

by Anonymous 4 months ago

Why do people get so weird about this? The point is to enjoy the (unabridged) story - how it's enjoyed is irrelevant.

by Olakin 4 months ago

If listening to audiobooks counts as reading the book, creating art with AI counts as being an artist.

by Anonymous 4 months ago

The activities are different yes. But if I listen to the whole ass book, later on, I'm gonna say "I read that book!" The end is the same. My vocabulary has grown and I know the plot of the book.

by DoorSelect425 4 months ago