I know this is an unpopular opinion, but listening to audio books isn’t reading.
It is a different sensory experience. It uses different parts of the brain and imagination too.
It is far closer to listening to a radio play.
I’m not saying it is any worse or better, just different.
I’m not sure that conflating the two is useful, particularly when talking about reading habits.
This is not an unpopular opinion.
You say it’s an unpopular opinion but the survey results in the linked article suggest that Britain generally agrees with you (52% responded “No, I do not” to the question “Do you consider listening to an audiobook as equivalent to having read that same book?”).
The “yes” option was around somewhat less popular overall (29%).
I say unpopular because those that do think audiobook are “books” tend to be very, very vocal about how wrong I am when I express that opinion… As if I’m somehow undermining their enjoyment or the legitimacy of their consumption.
The 52% on my side are just sat quietly reading books and minding their own business.
I already spend most of my day reading and writing documents so the idea of reading even more for fun just makes my eyes hurt. I love books but if I can enjoy them in a different format to let them rest then I’d be happy to do so. Audiobooks are a great experience when you’re out for an evening walk or staring at traffic for your commute.
Yep. Cool. There’s a place for them, certainly.
Still don’t think that’s reading though.
IDK why reading books is considered such a worthy activity per se, and nobody ever analyses what people read.
If we are going to be honest, most books are mere entertainment and there are also a lot of titles that actually make the reader a worse human being (I am thinking of books about conspiracies, neo-far-right manifestos, and similar waste of paper).
I think you make some interesting points… Content is important.
Although I think there’s such a desperation to get people into the reading habit that anything is considered good enough.
Remember the Harry Potter book when they first came out. I seem to remember a lot of chat about how those books were low effort, but that they encouraged a lot of life-long readers.
I know that here, in the UK, our education system tends to make people resent reading. Furthermore it instills some awful habits… Like feeling you have to finish a book even if you aren’t enjoying it (which usually means you stop reading altogether).
Anyway. That’s a long way of saying I think you are right.
Here too (Italy) the education system makes a pretty terrible job at teaching the joys of reading (or those of music, maths, and… pretty much anything to be honest).
Maybe that’s why people love soccer so much… because they have not been properly taught to like other things?
I’ve been told by people who live in the US (California, IDK if it’s the same elsewhere) that kids have reading periods at school where the class is silent and each kid sits by their own and reads whatever book they please.
It made me chuckle at first, but then I started wondering if that could work better than assigning books to read at home and report on like they do here.
Yeah I agree, reading is very time consuming and a lot of books are not more subtle than any movie or YouTube video. People should just be free to pickup their hobbies as long as they don’t become illiterate (which I don’t think you ca “become”?).
Is there a reason why the focus is always on books only?
I read technical documentation pretty much every day, I read technical blogposts every other day and news daily.
I read a lot, just not a book.
I don’t think there is conclusive evidence right now. But what I have heard hypothesized is that books require engaging your mind over a longer period of time on the same narrative thread broken up over numerous sittings. So, you improve your ability for complex, long-term cognition, since you have to commit to memory and recall details about that specific story, not just general ideas related to it.
I think it would also be problematic to exclusively read books personally. Not everything worth reading makes sense in a long format. Technical documentation is also part of my day-to-day.
deleted by creator
This is my problem. I love reading some denser scientific or social study stuff but sometimes just a few pages and my brain is burnt out. I could keep reading further but at that point i don’t retain as much because I’m still fleshing out the concepts and ideas from earlier.
Another 50% claim to have read a book.
10% have read a book
Many years ago, I learned that the average household only has five books. Looking at my library of more than ten thousand books, I realized that to reach that average, our family basically deprives a small town of their books. A depressing thought.
That also sounds like you might be depriving a university lecture hall of their square meters lol. 10k books, I dont think I’d have room for 100 even.
I’m feeling some extreme heat… my thermometer reads 451 Farenheit.
I’m a Canadian in the UK. I love to read, but I don’t have the bandwidth or time to sit and read right now. As such I fit into this statistic…
oh come on. books are so 1900s
I read a ton of memes on tiktok - does that count?
I’m surprised the lower class peasants are allowed to read in the first place.
I would blame the Big Tech social networks. My mom uses Instagram all the time and always claims she is getting “a lot of information”. I think that’s to blame. But also reading books isn’t something you force into people, it will make them hate it. It’s just a hobby, either you do it or you don’t. It makes people dumb? Ok. But you can’t force soul-searching (or any other reason to read a book) into someone.
I think that maybe events and other gatherings for readers would be good, people who are searching for something to fill their emptyness but don’t know what yet may get into books (or any other thing).
I also think that reading “A Vampire in my room” with a sexy Chad on the cover isn’t much better than using Instagram, so…
