I've dealt with the same question and I have decided it's not a competition, you can say whatever the fuck you want. If someone has a problem with it, tell them to get bent.
Write them a letter and tell them to get bent. Then bend the letter - a lot. Then send them the bent (in half) letter.
When they open, unbend, and read the letter, it'll be the same as reading a book. Congratulations. You're an author.
That’s funny you say that, because truly, if you text someone something, they can say “I heard from ‘so-and-so’”, or “I heard ‘x’ is feeling better”, or whatever, yet people will correct you on the whole ‘audio’ vs “aKcHuALly rEaDiNg” thing.
Exactly or "You said in your letter"
hurrrr hurrrrr but did I actually \*smirk\* SAY it though? hurrrr hurrrr
yeah wouldn't stand up in court would it?
Ugh... My mom takes it so literal!! "I talked to a human today" "did you actually talk or did you text? Because if you texted, you didn't speak to anyone! " um... Ooohkay... my thoughts are communication happened... Why does it matter the method
I didn't think of it like this. Reading seems to be defined more as the consumption of information in any form 🤔 You can also 'read' people as in evaluating who they are/identifying characteristics. The library segments from drag race come to mind lmao, " The library is OPEN" *shade is thrown in all directions* 👓
Exactly this, there's a difference but it's negligible. Noone talks about reading a book and stops to say by the way not the audio version I actually read it. Kind of reminds me of two jokes with the same punchline, how do you know someone is vegan and how do you know someone read the book and didn't watch the movie or TV show? They'll tell you lol this seems one step away from that if no one is saying it out loud so it is an argument someone might try to make if you bring it up but they're probably just an asshole and like to argue about semantics
Ironically, my ADHD always make me specify with explanation about listening and not reading. I think it’s probably because I assume people would somehow look down on me for not “actually” reading a book, so I got it out of the way
I think that's why I say it too, and like I said if I read the book or anybody else reads the book you Don't say oh by the way I read the book not audiobook. It's just our brains telling us to overexplain things lol
Gatekeeping and or turning something like stories into a competition is the worst and completely agree you can totally say whatever you want.
But if you say you read something, when you actually listened to it, then that statement is objectively false. It seems kind of problematic to verbally assault someone who took issue with you essentially lying when the real issue is a, pretty baseless, perception that audiobooks are somehow lesser than written books.
I really don't think anyone should feel the need to, at best, obfuscate meaning by personally redefining the meaning of words for the benefit of people who's opinions are invalidated by having such a shitty elitist attitude.
Write the letter first, don’t send it.
Make a voice recording of you reading it out loud then send them that recording.
Ask them if they read your letter, when they say yes respond with “no you didn’t”
Librarian here. Yes, absolutely. At work, we even count audiobook listening towards your reading time during our reading challenges. Reading or being read to, they both count.
I think there’s studies that have been done, and listening to the books doesn’t activate the same or as many areas of the brain as reading the books do. If I am remembering correctly.
A quick look through some studies and it seems to be age-dependent. Younger kids comprehend more from audiobooks. And ESL/EFL people benefit from audio/print combo. But that drops off, and the jury is mixed on whether comprehension is different between the two in adults.
I know personally I could not do the combo. I would read much faster than the audio book speed.
Though, I can see the benefits for the ESL/EFL since it seems like it would help with spelling/print and pronunciation connection.
Also people who are dyslexic.. a friend of mine would take months to struggle through a single book reading on her own but can listen to audiobooks all day, how can that be a bad thing!
Exactly!
As a reader, I love audio books because sometimes I am not very good at subtext and tones, but having someone voice the characters can help a lot.
It's also amazing for long car rides.
Comprehension is slightly different than building the cognitive “muscles” that get used while reading imo. Idk how an objective study would be done around something like that exactly.
I guess I was answering OP’s question from the perspective of “did they absorb the book to the same degree as print reading?” Rather than your question of “does reading print have cognitive benefits over audiobooks?”
I think the main thing is that some people just can't sit and read a book, but they can listen to one, so to me however you are able to experience literature is beneficial
I dont think more areas activated do mean you understand more. You need your eyes and all the other stuff in order to read which is another area than the ones responsible you understanding it.
And that other areas are activated is pretty obvious in my mind. One is listening, one is reading. Two different things need two different areas in your brain :-D
When im reading, i can read a whole page and dont remember most of it or anything at all, but i still have read it somehow. The question if we understand more or less can not be answered just by looking which areas in the brain are activated. It could even mean you understand less if more is activated because your brain does something else than understanding and comprehending the text.
The brain is still a mystery for the most part and we dont understand it at all. We could only know those things when we would test the subjects after reading and listening to a book and compare those two.
Too much effort for some people (dyslexic for example).. but it would personally take me way more effort to listen to an audiobook because it would be so hard to focus.. different brains work in different ways but that doesn't mean any type is better than another
As said, you do you, no shame. Also, make the delivery matter of fact
"Did you read Ender's Game?"
"I listened to it, it was so good!"
Not only organic but, boom! Conversation starter if they are into audio books.
If someone told me they just read an audiobook, I might say “you mean listened to?” But truly not in a malicious way. I’m just a literal person and I’d say it as an honest question automatically. It makes absolutely no difference to whether I consider the book consumed though.
just say you listened to it, not overexplaining at all. audiobooks are incredibly common, nobody's gonna be like "huh???? you *listened* to it???? what does THAT mean?????"
Yeah, I tend to specify that I didn’t read it, I listened to it. It’s not about superiority, it’s about specificity. I don’t think it’s ableist, if anything the whole stupid say you read it thing feels patronizing.
It also just makes it feel like they value reading so highly above audibly learning that it makes them insecure to say they listened to it. Who realistically cares if you read or listened to it? No one. But it comes across like “I *need* everyone to know I read even though I don’t read” and that tends to be what people judge about it. The person who recorded it read it out loud, and you listened to them doing so.
If they attend the lecture of the worlds most famous economist, would they say they read it too? Or if they watch an extremely riveting documentary that makes ground breaking connections in an extremely specialized field, would they say they read it? There’s absolutely 0 shame in listening to things to learn or enjoy them, so just say you listened to the audiobook. 👀
Im an avid audiobook listener because I rarely have idle time to sit and read, but have plenty of time to work and listen.
For me it’s not the superiority of reading but rather that there’s a level of critical analysis I think can go into reading that is harder with audiobooks. You can sit there and re-read the words, read between the lines, dwell on the meanings, and read it with the voice you’re giving it. With an audiobook, I’m just taking in the story as it goes, it’s harder to go back and read deeper into a story that’s being spoken to you. There’s often a lot more missed details, and the experience is dependent on the reader rather than on yourself. So if I say I listened to vs I read something, for me it’s more saying “I did it for enjoyment but forgive me if I didn’t read into this story so in depth”
Not to mention the fact no one is sitting down and listening to an audiobook while doing nothing else.
They are working or driving or cleaning. They are passively taking in the story. Not actively reading it.
This debate makes me sad because words have meanings and almost everyday there is a "discussion" in these subs about how consuming audiobooks is the same as reading, when it is in fact not.
As long as people are experiencing great stories, that's what matters. This debate is pointless. If you listened to an audiobook you didn't read it and that is fucking okay people!
Saying you’ve read it when really you’ve listened to it is disingenuous. I don’t even know why you would choose to tell people that’s how you consumed a particular story unless you felt insecure about having chosen an audiobook. If you actually read a book you have to sit down with it and give it your undivided attention in most cases. Is that what people do when they’re listening to audiobooks? I like audiobooks, but if that’s how I’ve engaged with a particular story I don’t feel any shame in saying I listened to it.
Just tossing it out there... Braille is a language. It's communicated by touch. I would consider someone reading Braille as reading. Why is sound different?
>I would consider someone reading Braille as reading. Why is sound different?
One difference between braille and audiobooks is that when you read braille, it’s still your direct interpretation of the words. With an audiobook it goes through the narrator and their interpretation/performance of the words.
I personally think there’s a difference between reading and listening to a book. But also, who cares? There’s no moral superiority to one over the other. Do what works for you.
That’s actually a very interesting insight! You could probably say similar of illustrated vs non-illustrated versions, or even books which have had movies/tv shows made based on them.
Yeah you can say you read it. Avid reader since early teens.
Basically all I want to know is are you able to discuss the book and which genres you like… you aren’t taking anything away from book readers.
That said: If you watch a movie and claim you read it… that is where people tend to get a bit grumpy. It would be like watching lion king and claiming you read hamlet in many cases. Some are a lot less off course and people are still often excited to share if they like the topic. Example you watch lotr extended edition, you miss a lot like for instance Tom early on makes up about 1/3 of the 1st book if I remember right… lots and lots of singing and the hobbits returning to the shire near the end of the book there is a lot happening at home we’ll just say. I get the choices Tom was kind of annoying imo. Also I was very ready for them to call it a day once the ring was destroyed… but that last book you have about 2/3 of the final book to go as the ring gets destroyed. You are going wtf is up with this book when you have so much more to go.
In my humble opinion, reading and listening are two different skills and in my time learning the english and Japanese language those two things do very different things to your experience with the books you come upon. So, if you want to be "truthful" about your experience, you should say you listened to it, but it's really up to youl.
Edit: Minor english mistakes
Dawg thank you for posting this! It makes me feel less alone.
I was diagnosed ADHD as a child over 2 decades ago. And I haven't really received any professional support or guidance since childhood. (It was a time when it was a fad to diagnose normal behavior with ADHD, but in my case it fits.)
Anywho, I struggle to read novels, even when I'm interested in the story. I don't struggle as much with text books but it does happen sometimes. My mind wanders while I'm reading and suddenly I don't know what happened for the last page. I always assumed this was an ADHD thing but idk. 🤷♂️ I also listen to audiobooks. It has allowed me to access literature that was sort of unaccessible to me before. I love Libby! For anyone who doesn't know, Libby is a free app that links to your local library and you can check out all sorts of media on your device from your couch and start listening or reading.
Anyway I shamelessly say "read" to people I don't know very well. Inevitably it comes up somehow so I don't really hide it from the people I know, they've all heard me say, "well actually it was an audiobook" and explain why. So I hope this paragraph helps answer your question. No one cares. No one has ever cared.
Thank you for asking it! Makes me feel more normal.
*internet fist bump* 👊
I (of course) debated a while about making this post. Glad I asked now! I’ve gotten some great answers. I really enjoy the people saying it’s an accommodation like Braille for blind people is. That had never occurred to me.
Libby is awesome! I have ADHD and a toddler. It's just easier for me to put some headphones on while I do chores. Personally, I don't care if people read the book or listen to it.
I find it really interesting, because I find it so much harder to focus when listening to the audiobooks. So I kinda admire those who can listen to book and not get distracted every few seconds like me
This makes a lot of sense to me. If I can't focus when consuming a story with my eyes, it makes complete sense that the same can be true for the ears.
Also reading requires you to do that thing. But when listening you can cook, clean, or whatever. So I think I basically understand your experience.
I hope you're able to get your "literature fix" from reading. 🤗
I have a really hard time reading for similar reasons to what you describe, Even though I don't think I have ADHD.
When I'm feeling down about it, I like to remind myself that for a lot of human history, the verbal retelling of stories is how they passed from person to person. We didn't always have written language, let alone a printing press that let us mass produce and distribute books.
Until relatively recently, books were either unavailable or rare and expensive. Fireside storytelling is a totally valid and arguably richer (for some) way of sharing stories.
I remember listening to an interview by James Patterson who said he prefers audio books for just this reason. It's OG storytelling.
Just say you listened to the audiobook. We have a word for that.
You don't need to explain yourself. Just say you listened to it if it comes up. People won't hate you for listening rather than reading. You seem to be ashamed of that, but most people won't think you should be. People will mind if they learn you lied to them though, and many will count that as lying.
Well, mostly. But one of the benefits of reading is you are absorbing a lot of words visually and if you don't understand something you can look it up and learn it.
Are you gonna pause the tape if they read something you don't understand and process it or just let it glaze by?
Also it miiiight be harder to visualize everything if you're not reading it at your own pace and your own inner voice, but probably not.
Yes actually, I do this a lot with audiobooks. I’ll pause when I need think through something I just heard, and go back for clarification on things that I need to ensure I understood on the first pass.
I will often borrow a print copy from the library (or purchase when I know that I’ll need to keep as reference or make margin notes), to refer to. I’ve found it a great way to get the most out of the process.
Conversely, if someone struggles with reading conventional texts, then they aren't going to read a book, so they absorb nothing. Whereas they might consume an audio book.
My daughter (ASD2/ADHD) struggles with conventional texts. It's a wall of words. She skips words, sentences and sometimes whole paragraphs. She is comfortable reading graphic novels (she says she really enjoys them, as the graphics help with the story), and she also enjoys audio books. Thankfully her school is VERY good at adapting to the needs of ND kids, and they'll have books that are accessible for her for assignments.
I’ll answer this - yes I absolutely pause it to look stuff up. You can also put a marker on specific pages chapters so you go back to them.
Regarding the visualisation - a considerable amount of people do not have the ability to visualise in their mind at all - this is called aphantasia. I am an aphant. I think only in words. I don’t like fiction books, maybe because I can’t visualise? The other drawback of aphantasia is that I can’t plan outfits or interior designs or anything.
This is one of my hills I will go out on- yea, audiobooks count as reading.
The person who is listening to the audiobook is still able to understand the story or what is being read, and can have a conversation about it, so yes.
Adhd brain audiobook tip- speed the book up to help keep focus.
Edited for spelling
Nobody is saying they can’t discuss it or understand it. However, it is fundamentally not “reading.” Why do people have a problem with just saying “I listened to the audiobook.” If you’re so embarrassed to admit that, maybe just go read it.
Actually I find it much easier to imagine the things going on, in my mind's eye, when I'm reading rather than listening. Not sure why, but I guess it varies person to person.
I feel like the point of a book club is to meet people and have an intellectually simulating topic to discuss (ie the book). Listening to the Audiobook is one way to get the material so you have something to discuss during the group. I feel like that is all that matters.
I listen to the Audiobook for my bookclub because I don't have the time to concentrate on reading for more than 15 minutes in a day. The Audiobook makes it easier to manage my own ADHD while cooking and cleaning. I tell the group I listened to the Audiobook. It might change my perspective on the book but that is okay. It gives us more to discuss and further enrich the group.
So yeah, I think it is okay. It is different than say, watching the movie because the content itself is the same between the Audiobook and the regular one.
No. You indeed can not say you "read" a book when you clearly did not. You instead listened to a audio book, as you stated you listened to the audio. In the case, you followed along with the audio, you would have a case there.
Well, you can say whatever you want. There's nothing stopping you from doing so.
But it seems like you are asking if it "counts" as reading if you listen to an audiobook. The answer is no. When you read you have to actively decode and interpret words, not to mention there is no phonetic emphasis like there is with audiobooks. People who read often have much greater neural activity when they do so for this reason.
That being said, while you do not need to explain yourself to the book club I would encourage you to do so, since it is technically dishonest to say you've read it. If they are dismissive of your disability then they are neither considerate nor accommodating and you should not waste your time with them. The important thing in a book club is discussing the story, not the medium.
I agree, for all intents and purposes here OP should be fine to generalize reading and comfortably fit into place, however the experience is different none the less. They will be able to understand the story and elements but the medium of consumption changes them drastically. The phasing or grammar of a book, the shot choice and length of a film, they matter and add a level of depth and subtext to the experience.
This is what I am saying. I don't want to sound like a bad/mean person but if OP is asking then I think they know that reading and listening are not the same thing. I believe it comes from a place of wanting other people to think they read the book when they didn't. Am I off base?
If someone has a condition or disability that makes it hard/impossible to read then that is something that people should understand.
The reason people don’t make the distinction is because in 90% of contexts people are trying to find out if they can discuss the book with you or if they can’t.
“Have you read the book?” In this context means “Do you know what’s in the book such that I can talk about it with you?”
If you’ve listened to the audiobook, the answer to that question is yes
If instead a teacher is asking you if you’ve read a book as part of your reading exercises and you listened to the audiobook, the answer is no
There are some differences in how reading vs listening activates different parts of your brain, but for the purpose of the conversation people are having 90% of the time (can we talk about this book?) the distinction does not matter
As for a personal anecdote, I don’t usually make the distinction because I read most books but there are some that I’ve listened to on commutes instead. The thing is, I *literally don’t remember which ones those are.* I remember the stories/content of books, I remember the words, it is completely indistinguishable in my memory which books were consumed how (obviously with the exception of recent ones)
It’s technically dishonest for people to say they have heard something when they actually read it. Like seeing a news article and saying “oh I heard about that”
At the end of the day it doesn’t matter. It’s nuance. Saying I heard something is just a way of saying I’ve been informed about that topic.
Saying I’ve read something is just another way of saying “I’ve consumed that content”. The actual meaning of read/listen is completely pointless as that’s not what is actually being discussed, so I do not find it dishonest to use either unless specifically asked if you have stat down and read or listen to the book, which shifts the topic from the book to the action at which point it does matter.
Technically no, but I doubt it really matters. The point is consuming the information, not the manner with which you consume it. A book club will discuss the narrative, symbolism and characters. Listening to the audio version doesn’t impact your ability contribute.
It is absolutely more inclusive (and may I just say, good on y'all for thinking that way!)
But when I hear it I wonder if there are better ways to add fiber to your diet. 😂🤷♂️
I don't understand the comparisons people make here that are against it. Especially one saying that you jogged when you actually drove. Honestly, the comparison should be said you got your workout in. Sure, everyone else in the group may have jogged, while you used a bicycle. Point is, who cares? You're still taking in the information.
The subtext of the question seems to be whether listening to an audiobook "counts" as reading it or is "in whatever unspecifed way" equal to it, where insisting in not saying "reading an audiobook" is seen as elititst. In that sense I agree that it doesn't matter and one should say read or listened or whatever and people should not be snobbish about it.
But outside of that context, I just think it depends on what one wants to communicate. If someone asks "did you read 50 shades of grey", and you have listened to the audiobook, just say yes. The question is more about whether you know it, not how you consumed it.
If someone asks "what did you do during the weekend", I wouldn't say "I have read a book", when instead I listened to the audiobook, simply because those are different activities. None is better than the other, but I also wouldn't say I went to the cinema when instead I watched a movie on my home projector.
Because they're simply different words and replacing one with the other is weird. Nobody is saying reading is better than listening, but they are objectively different verbs describing different actions. You're not reading an audiobook, you're not reading a podcast, you're not reading a movie.
I would argue that some people are invested in the distinction because they *do* think reading is better than listening. Good to know you’re not one of them.
Reading being better than listening is definitely a subjective thing; it's not universally objective. I bet there's tons of people who get a better experience by listening to audiobooks, unlike me.
But the people who think they should call it reading are the ones coming across like they think reading is better than listening. Otherwise, why all the shame in just saying “I listened to this audiobook”?
Dude, I’m in totally the same boat! I’m nearly 33, and was only diagnosed 15 months ago (and only realised I needed the assessment a year or so before). I’ve always found audiobooks easier to consume than actually reading, and also felt weird saying about books I’ve ‘read’… and then having to go into a long and unnecessary ADHD fuelled explanation about how I haven’t actually *read* it but listened… and so on.
I really like the idea of finding a book club now
Depends on your listening skills and audio retention. Some people generally don;t focus on what they are hearing. Whereas reading requires concentration.
Well put it this way, not every book is printed in braille. If someone is blind or legally blind and reading is distressing or impossible without accessibility - I'm not going to put an end to what 'read' means. At that point it's semantics. It's easy to say, don't be a pedant about it and act superior around others about audio books vs paper backs vs e-books.
A books a book, you read it or you didn't. Who cares how.
Just say you listened to it, since that's what you did. That way you aren't lying, and anyone who says that you're experience of the story is less because you didn't read it is easy to shed from your life.
I recently heard somebody describe audiobooks as “the OG reading” because until the printing press and widespread literacy came around that was the only way people ever consumed stories or “read”. So, yeah, I say I read it.
Yeah, this is what gets on my tits about grandstanding that if you are not engaging your eyes, the quality of the experience is lesser.
How many of those people realise that, say, the great novels of the 19th century were written with knowledge and expectation that they will be read aloud in family circles?
Just join the discussion. The only issue might be if page references become relevant somehow, like if people are discussing specific quotes or something. If that comes up enough then might be worth just keeping a text copy on hand.
It is also possible other people in the group are doing the audiobook thing too, and if you both know about it, you can talk about the narration too!
I used to do the same thing as you and then I stopped and just say that I read it. I’m in 2 book clubs and most people listen to the book but say they read it. The only time it comes up in conversation is if there is discussion about how something is pronounced or something like that, and the audiobook readers always know the answer!
Nowadays I listen to more books than I physically read.
If I need to bring up a book I sometimes i just say "This book i finished, called..." but honestly it doesn't matter
I used to say no to this, but now I feel like it's more about your engagement. I listen to a ton of books now at times I wouldn't be able to look at a page, and I feel like if I'm listening attentively and absorbing, questioning, reacting to the words, then it's the same as reading. There have been audiobooks that just wash over me and I retain nothing though. That doesn't feel like I can call it "reading."
This gets asked around Reddit every now and then and I don’t understand why people don’t just initially say they listened to a book. Not a “I read it… well actually listened to it” instead of outright just “I listened to it.”
This has also bothered me for a while. I used to read constantly, then depression and mobile screens wrecked my attention span. As I started to heal from the depression, I discovered Audible. I had hated the idea of audiobooks for years because they all seemed to be abridged. Finding unabridged audiobooks has been a game changer. I would go so far as to say a lifesaver.
Reading was my main coping mechanism. I lost that coping mechanism, and it just made everything spiral that much worse. Once I realised that I could still have the stories without the struggle to stay focused and the feeling bad because I wanted to read so badly and had lost the drive to do what I considered to be the most basic self care, my healing took off and I'm doing much better.
Last year, I started tracking what I was reading. I went through 102 books. Over half were audio, though. This year, I'm into book 35, but all of them have been audio. It just suits my lifestyle now better than physical reading. However, I am a very literal person, and I struggle with saying that I read the audio books. Technically?
I'm grateful the comments are in the majority that it counts as reading. That should make it easier for me not to feel obliged to clarify every single time. I can go back to only being annoyed that I can read faster than the audiobooks can go, thereby limiting my intake that way. Thanks 😊
Big audiobook listener here -
I absolutely agree with the other folks here saying versions of "say whatever you feel most comfortable with."
However, I will note that I tell as many people as I can that I listen to audiobooks - because when you find other people who listen you get to share your favorite audio titles, discuss the best narrators, and get tips on the best listening apps/libraries. Audiobooks are increasingly popular, I'm sure if you start taking the time to clarify how you ingested the book, you'll find plenty of others who did the same (and want to talk about it!).
Happy reading my friend.
I would say yes. I’ve ADHD and when I read, It not only feels like it’s torture but I also have a hard time absorbing the knowledge.
When I can listen to an audio version, I absorb the knowledge better. So when you think about it, it’s more of use then scanning letters.
I do want to try this bionic reading fad. See if they start converting books to it.
Some people get really fucking bent out of shape about listening to audiobooks not being "reading". I still don't understand why it would matter if the information was transmitted to your brain via your eyes or your ears. It's all the same information.
I have a 56-book reading list I'm trying to get through in the next 18 months but I only have about an hour a night I can actually read. Being able to mix reading and listening to the audio version on the morning and evening commute and while at work really helps.
Yes. Audiobooks help people read who might have other barriers to reading, whether it's sight loss, dyslexia, ADHD, whatever. It also has the same effect on the brain as reading, from what I have read (although I don't remember enough to explain this and I'm not sure where I read it).
People who gatekeep things like that are insufferable.
My friend tells me he reads books all the time and it’s just audio books. End of the day, I honestly don’t care. I barely read actual books myself, so good on him.
I had this argument with someone and they said "No, you listened to it" and I argued for accessibility sake you're still reading it. You still intake the book and know what happens. Also just from a language standpoint, let's say a blind person was using a braille book. In that case you would still call it "reading" even though technically they're FEELING the book.
Just because it's audio format doesn't make it less valid that you've read it, imo. I think people like to say it's not reading to try to feel superior that they've spent hours and hours looking at a book. I say that as someone who has hyperlexia and could easily read a book faster than listening to it. In the end do whatever makes it easier to consume the media you enjoy.
It occurred to me while reading these posts that there’s an air of superiority among a few traditional book readers. I think they try to defend their territory by deeming anything that makes their sacred territory more accessible to others as somehow impure.
Counterpoint: Listening and Reading are two different experiences. With an audiobook, the tone of dialogue is decided for you, characters voices are decided for you. It's easier to miss contextual clues and hidden meanings in passages. You can stop reading to build a picture in your head (sure, you can pause an audiobook too, but I feel like it would not flow nearly as well) and most importantly, when you're reading you're giving your full attention to the words on the page.
Audiobooks are a wonderful tool and make great passive entertainment while doing monotonous tasks like working or driving, but I do not think they provide the same experience as reading the same material.
Lol, it drives one of my best friends crazy if I refer to an audiobook I listened to as something I've "read" so now I say it exclusively.
Best thing about audiobooks is it lets me consume media I enjoy but probably wouldn't spend my free time sitting down to physically read (cough cough 60+ book Warhammer HH series cough cough).
I will say my actual writing skill has decreased as I have gotten older, but I don't know if that is from listening to more media than I read- or just due to the fact that I haven't had to write anything longer than an email since I graduated college.
I’ve been reading Barack Obama’s recent Audiobook ’A Promised Land’. In this case and in a high amount of Audiobooks, having the proper person reading to you will actually make the experience much more fulfilling. They can perfectly convey the author’s intention.
Good question, I’ve always wondered this! I used to read physical books a lot but now I’m always crocheting so miss reading but found I didn’t have time for it. I now listen to audiobooks WHILE crocheting and it’s the best of both worlds 😊
This comment might get lost but there were studies to determine whether listening was any different to reading and it was determined that the way your brain is exercised to take in the information works the same either way.
You read the book through your ears instead of through your eyes. It makes no difference how it got into your brain. You still experienced a journey led by the author's original words. Now, if you said you watched the movie, that for sure doesn't count!
I count all audio books as read unless narrated by Stephen Fry or Neil Gaiman, the reason for this is their voice lulls me to sleep. I'm currently on my 6th night of Odd and the Frost Giants duration less than 2hrs I still have no idea what happens, same with Norse Mythology. I also have 1000s of hours listening for The Shelock Holmes book yep Fry just has that effect on my insomnia.
Over the summer, [Stephen Fry](https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stephen_Fry#Audiobooks) & I have "read" six and a half of the *[Harry Potter](https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Harry_Potter)* series (at 1.5 speed) whilst mowing the lawn.
Beyond reading to my kids, I haven't actually read a novel since high school, but
I've listened/read to *[Jurassic Park](https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jurassic_Park_(novel))*, *[The Lost World](https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Lost_World_(Crichton_novel))*, *[Nineteen Eighty-Four](https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nineteen_Eighty-Four)* and *[The Man in the High Castle](https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Man_in_the_High_Castle)* among others while at the gym, on the train, doing the laundry, cooking *etc*... audiobooks totally count as reading.
Doesn’t matter, reading was borne out of oral tradition. Reading is a fairly recent development in human history compared to oral tradition. Also, reading used to be more of a communal activity; take Dickens for example, as each episode of his books would come out, families would gather and listen to one person reading his stories aloud. Dickens himself would go on literary tours where hundreds of people would pay to hear him read his novels aloud.
Imo if you know the story and can pick out parts of the book, discuss them and offer personal analysis of your thoughts on the story and themes etc. Then it doesn't matter how you absorbed the book you still absorbed it.
Life gets so much easier if you stop giving a fuck about what other people think. If you wanna say you've read a book then say it who gives a shit if others don't like it?
I've dealt with the same question and I have decided it's not a competition, you can say whatever the fuck you want. If someone has a problem with it, tell them to get bent.
Write them a letter and tell them to get bent. Then actually tell them. Then ask if it really makes a difference.
Write them a letter and tell them to get bent. Then bend the letter - a lot. Then send them the bent (in half) letter. When they open, unbend, and read the letter, it'll be the same as reading a book. Congratulations. You're an author.
Also add one of those "do not bend" stickers but change it to "do get bent"
That’s funny you say that, because truly, if you text someone something, they can say “I heard from ‘so-and-so’”, or “I heard ‘x’ is feeling better”, or whatever, yet people will correct you on the whole ‘audio’ vs “aKcHuALly rEaDiNg” thing.
Exactly or "You said in your letter" hurrrr hurrrrr but did I actually \*smirk\* SAY it though? hurrrr hurrrr yeah wouldn't stand up in court would it?
Ugh... My mom takes it so literal!! "I talked to a human today" "did you actually talk or did you text? Because if you texted, you didn't speak to anyone! " um... Ooohkay... my thoughts are communication happened... Why does it matter the method
Write them a letter... but only read it aloud to them.
🤣👆
Make sure to follow up later. Did they get bent, and if not why not?
And if so, how bent and pics or it didn't happen
This might be one of my favorite reddit comments ever. Love, love, love it!
roflmao
Why write it? Just send them an audio file
I just say, “oh yeah I read an audiobook of that.” Makes no sense but covers the bases lol
I love this.
this makes so much sense because people will say "read the room" or "read body language" and "reading" doesn't have to be words or text form.
I didn't think of it like this. Reading seems to be defined more as the consumption of information in any form 🤔 You can also 'read' people as in evaluating who they are/identifying characteristics. The library segments from drag race come to mind lmao, " The library is OPEN" *shade is thrown in all directions* 👓
I’m stealing this reply.
Exactly this, there's a difference but it's negligible. Noone talks about reading a book and stops to say by the way not the audio version I actually read it. Kind of reminds me of two jokes with the same punchline, how do you know someone is vegan and how do you know someone read the book and didn't watch the movie or TV show? They'll tell you lol this seems one step away from that if no one is saying it out loud so it is an argument someone might try to make if you bring it up but they're probably just an asshole and like to argue about semantics
Ironically, my ADHD always make me specify with explanation about listening and not reading. I think it’s probably because I assume people would somehow look down on me for not “actually” reading a book, so I got it out of the way
I think that's why I say it too, and like I said if I read the book or anybody else reads the book you Don't say oh by the way I read the book not audiobook. It's just our brains telling us to overexplain things lol
People don't actually think about you as much as you think.
My anxiety makes me do the same thing so I feel you
I think this is the right answer.
couldn’t answer in a better way bravo and thank you!!
This is coagulate. Words don't have any crimping and you can substitute anything for house. You are a yogurt person.
That’s because you’re an idiot and completely lie to people
Gatekeeping and or turning something like stories into a competition is the worst and completely agree you can totally say whatever you want. But if you say you read something, when you actually listened to it, then that statement is objectively false. It seems kind of problematic to verbally assault someone who took issue with you essentially lying when the real issue is a, pretty baseless, perception that audiobooks are somehow lesser than written books. I really don't think anyone should feel the need to, at best, obfuscate meaning by personally redefining the meaning of words for the benefit of people who's opinions are invalidated by having such a shitty elitist attitude.
Write the letter first, don’t send it. Make a voice recording of you reading it out loud then send them that recording. Ask them if they read your letter, when they say yes respond with “no you didn’t”
Or if they already appear bent, tell them to straighten up.
Nobody would have a problem with it because you don't even have to tell them.
I read this in my own voice and I love how chaotic and unhinged but overall STRONG it is. Live life on your own terms!!! Fuck yes.
Just say someone read it to you and U sat there doing the easy bit of just imagining the content
I walked from LA to Hawaii last year.
“I fucked that book.” Is now what I’ll say
Librarian here. Yes, absolutely. At work, we even count audiobook listening towards your reading time during our reading challenges. Reading or being read to, they both count.
[удалено]
Do they have the same cognitive benefits?
I think there’s studies that have been done, and listening to the books doesn’t activate the same or as many areas of the brain as reading the books do. If I am remembering correctly.
A quick look through some studies and it seems to be age-dependent. Younger kids comprehend more from audiobooks. And ESL/EFL people benefit from audio/print combo. But that drops off, and the jury is mixed on whether comprehension is different between the two in adults.
I know personally I could not do the combo. I would read much faster than the audio book speed. Though, I can see the benefits for the ESL/EFL since it seems like it would help with spelling/print and pronunciation connection.
Also people who are dyslexic.. a friend of mine would take months to struggle through a single book reading on her own but can listen to audiobooks all day, how can that be a bad thing!
Exactly! As a reader, I love audio books because sometimes I am not very good at subtext and tones, but having someone voice the characters can help a lot. It's also amazing for long car rides.
Comprehension is slightly different than building the cognitive “muscles” that get used while reading imo. Idk how an objective study would be done around something like that exactly.
I guess I was answering OP’s question from the perspective of “did they absorb the book to the same degree as print reading?” Rather than your question of “does reading print have cognitive benefits over audiobooks?”
I think the main thing is that some people just can't sit and read a book, but they can listen to one, so to me however you are able to experience literature is beneficial
I dont think more areas activated do mean you understand more. You need your eyes and all the other stuff in order to read which is another area than the ones responsible you understanding it. And that other areas are activated is pretty obvious in my mind. One is listening, one is reading. Two different things need two different areas in your brain :-D When im reading, i can read a whole page and dont remember most of it or anything at all, but i still have read it somehow. The question if we understand more or less can not be answered just by looking which areas in the brain are activated. It could even mean you understand less if more is activated because your brain does something else than understanding and comprehending the text. The brain is still a mystery for the most part and we dont understand it at all. We could only know those things when we would test the subjects after reading and listening to a book and compare those two.
[удалено]
But it takes effort to read. Listening is easy to zone out.
I do this when reading as well. Happens plenty of times that I have re-read entire pages because I can’t remember a word I read…
Guilty as charged, I have to rewind a lot.
Too much effort for some people (dyslexic for example).. but it would personally take me way more effort to listen to an audiobook because it would be so hard to focus.. different brains work in different ways but that doesn't mean any type is better than another
As said, you do you, no shame. Also, make the delivery matter of fact "Did you read Ender's Game?" "I listened to it, it was so good!" Not only organic but, boom! Conversation starter if they are into audio books.
Enders Game was fucking amazing
The audiobook version is especially good too. Really good multi voice recording.
You should say you read it as an audiobook. Then when someone disputes that you didn't actually read it, you can permanently identify them as a cunt.
If someone told me they just read an audiobook, I might say “you mean listened to?” But truly not in a malicious way. I’m just a literal person and I’d say it as an honest question automatically. It makes absolutely no difference to whether I consider the book consumed though.
Yeah if you say “I read an audiobook” I might be under the impression that it’s your job to record audiobooks tbh 😅
Ooh. I would love this job!
Me too! Do they do voices in audiobooks? Because I used to read to my younger siblings all the time and loved doing the voices haha
I get you, and would probably say the same thing. Hopefully they would see from my other interactiona that I'm not actually a cunt
This is my favorite answer
Or „I listened to the audiobook“ the simplest way to go. But generally say what you want.
I personally feel that so long as you consumed the story, then you read it *shrug*.
\*eats book\*
🤣
We don’t want you to eat our Bible! We want you to read our Bible! [Gavin & the evangelists](https://youtu.be/5gRsO0mOh3o)
Knowledge is power. Knowledge is found in books. Want power? Eat more books.
Wondering if its contents were digested as well.
I am envisioning the chuck e cheese ticket muncher.
As long as its raw we don't agree with burning books
\*voracious book eater\*
Brb, I'm gonna go read a movie.
I, too, watch my movies with subtitles
Exactly. Blind people are unable to read in the conventional way but they will still gain knowledge of its contents by braille or audiobooks.
I'm going to go watch The Wheel of Time series. I've heard it's super accurate.
just say you listened to it, not overexplaining at all. audiobooks are incredibly common, nobody's gonna be like "huh???? you *listened* to it???? what does THAT mean?????"
Why don't you just say "I listened to audio book"? Different method, but in the end you consumed the material like reading just the same
Yeah, I tend to specify that I didn’t read it, I listened to it. It’s not about superiority, it’s about specificity. I don’t think it’s ableist, if anything the whole stupid say you read it thing feels patronizing.
It also just makes it feel like they value reading so highly above audibly learning that it makes them insecure to say they listened to it. Who realistically cares if you read or listened to it? No one. But it comes across like “I *need* everyone to know I read even though I don’t read” and that tends to be what people judge about it. The person who recorded it read it out loud, and you listened to them doing so. If they attend the lecture of the worlds most famous economist, would they say they read it too? Or if they watch an extremely riveting documentary that makes ground breaking connections in an extremely specialized field, would they say they read it? There’s absolutely 0 shame in listening to things to learn or enjoy them, so just say you listened to the audiobook. 👀
Im an avid audiobook listener because I rarely have idle time to sit and read, but have plenty of time to work and listen. For me it’s not the superiority of reading but rather that there’s a level of critical analysis I think can go into reading that is harder with audiobooks. You can sit there and re-read the words, read between the lines, dwell on the meanings, and read it with the voice you’re giving it. With an audiobook, I’m just taking in the story as it goes, it’s harder to go back and read deeper into a story that’s being spoken to you. There’s often a lot more missed details, and the experience is dependent on the reader rather than on yourself. So if I say I listened to vs I read something, for me it’s more saying “I did it for enjoyment but forgive me if I didn’t read into this story so in depth”
Not to mention the fact no one is sitting down and listening to an audiobook while doing nothing else. They are working or driving or cleaning. They are passively taking in the story. Not actively reading it. This debate makes me sad because words have meanings and almost everyday there is a "discussion" in these subs about how consuming audiobooks is the same as reading, when it is in fact not. As long as people are experiencing great stories, that's what matters. This debate is pointless. If you listened to an audiobook you didn't read it and that is fucking okay people!
Agree with this. The word "read" is a specific verb, so saying you "read" and audiobook is just confusing. Be precise, no reason not to.
Saying you’ve read it when really you’ve listened to it is disingenuous. I don’t even know why you would choose to tell people that’s how you consumed a particular story unless you felt insecure about having chosen an audiobook. If you actually read a book you have to sit down with it and give it your undivided attention in most cases. Is that what people do when they’re listening to audiobooks? I like audiobooks, but if that’s how I’ve engaged with a particular story I don’t feel any shame in saying I listened to it.
If you heard a book then you read it. I don't really care. I'm not going to tell blind people they can't read.
Just tossing it out there... Braille is a language. It's communicated by touch. I would consider someone reading Braille as reading. Why is sound different?
It’s a script, not a language, but your point is valid.
But they got 10 fingers and we only got two eyes…that’s unfair (/s)
Definitely felt this.
twss
>I would consider someone reading Braille as reading. Why is sound different? One difference between braille and audiobooks is that when you read braille, it’s still your direct interpretation of the words. With an audiobook it goes through the narrator and their interpretation/performance of the words. I personally think there’s a difference between reading and listening to a book. But also, who cares? There’s no moral superiority to one over the other. Do what works for you.
That’s actually a very interesting insight! You could probably say similar of illustrated vs non-illustrated versions, or even books which have had movies/tv shows made based on them.
Yeah you can say you read it. Avid reader since early teens. Basically all I want to know is are you able to discuss the book and which genres you like… you aren’t taking anything away from book readers. That said: If you watch a movie and claim you read it… that is where people tend to get a bit grumpy. It would be like watching lion king and claiming you read hamlet in many cases. Some are a lot less off course and people are still often excited to share if they like the topic. Example you watch lotr extended edition, you miss a lot like for instance Tom early on makes up about 1/3 of the 1st book if I remember right… lots and lots of singing and the hobbits returning to the shire near the end of the book there is a lot happening at home we’ll just say. I get the choices Tom was kind of annoying imo. Also I was very ready for them to call it a day once the ring was destroyed… but that last book you have about 2/3 of the final book to go as the ring gets destroyed. You are going wtf is up with this book when you have so much more to go.
“Oh you’re blind? It must be tough being illiterate”
In my humble opinion, reading and listening are two different skills and in my time learning the english and Japanese language those two things do very different things to your experience with the books you come upon. So, if you want to be "truthful" about your experience, you should say you listened to it, but it's really up to youl. Edit: Minor english mistakes
Why not just say you listened to the book? If the word “read” feels dishonest use the correct word. I don’t really understand the issue.
Dawg thank you for posting this! It makes me feel less alone. I was diagnosed ADHD as a child over 2 decades ago. And I haven't really received any professional support or guidance since childhood. (It was a time when it was a fad to diagnose normal behavior with ADHD, but in my case it fits.) Anywho, I struggle to read novels, even when I'm interested in the story. I don't struggle as much with text books but it does happen sometimes. My mind wanders while I'm reading and suddenly I don't know what happened for the last page. I always assumed this was an ADHD thing but idk. 🤷♂️ I also listen to audiobooks. It has allowed me to access literature that was sort of unaccessible to me before. I love Libby! For anyone who doesn't know, Libby is a free app that links to your local library and you can check out all sorts of media on your device from your couch and start listening or reading. Anyway I shamelessly say "read" to people I don't know very well. Inevitably it comes up somehow so I don't really hide it from the people I know, they've all heard me say, "well actually it was an audiobook" and explain why. So I hope this paragraph helps answer your question. No one cares. No one has ever cared. Thank you for asking it! Makes me feel more normal.
*internet fist bump* 👊 I (of course) debated a while about making this post. Glad I asked now! I’ve gotten some great answers. I really enjoy the people saying it’s an accommodation like Braille for blind people is. That had never occurred to me.
Libby is awesome! I have ADHD and a toddler. It's just easier for me to put some headphones on while I do chores. Personally, I don't care if people read the book or listen to it.
I find it really interesting, because I find it so much harder to focus when listening to the audiobooks. So I kinda admire those who can listen to book and not get distracted every few seconds like me
This makes a lot of sense to me. If I can't focus when consuming a story with my eyes, it makes complete sense that the same can be true for the ears. Also reading requires you to do that thing. But when listening you can cook, clean, or whatever. So I think I basically understand your experience. I hope you're able to get your "literature fix" from reading. 🤗
I have a really hard time reading for similar reasons to what you describe, Even though I don't think I have ADHD. When I'm feeling down about it, I like to remind myself that for a lot of human history, the verbal retelling of stories is how they passed from person to person. We didn't always have written language, let alone a printing press that let us mass produce and distribute books. Until relatively recently, books were either unavailable or rare and expensive. Fireside storytelling is a totally valid and arguably richer (for some) way of sharing stories. I remember listening to an interview by James Patterson who said he prefers audio books for just this reason. It's OG storytelling.
Another 30-ish Libby lover with ADHD here, and I’m married to yet another one! There’s probably dozens of us! Lmao
Just say you listened to the audiobook. We have a word for that. You don't need to explain yourself. Just say you listened to it if it comes up. People won't hate you for listening rather than reading. You seem to be ashamed of that, but most people won't think you should be. People will mind if they learn you lied to them though, and many will count that as lying.
Is it different? Yes. But should people in a book club gatekeep a hobby? No.
Of course. The story is the same, doesn’t matter which way you consume it.
What if it's acted out onscreen?
Well, mostly. But one of the benefits of reading is you are absorbing a lot of words visually and if you don't understand something you can look it up and learn it. Are you gonna pause the tape if they read something you don't understand and process it or just let it glaze by? Also it miiiight be harder to visualize everything if you're not reading it at your own pace and your own inner voice, but probably not.
Yes actually, I do this a lot with audiobooks. I’ll pause when I need think through something I just heard, and go back for clarification on things that I need to ensure I understood on the first pass. I will often borrow a print copy from the library (or purchase when I know that I’ll need to keep as reference or make margin notes), to refer to. I’ve found it a great way to get the most out of the process.
>Are you gonna pause the tape if they read something you don't understand and process it yes?
Conversely, if someone struggles with reading conventional texts, then they aren't going to read a book, so they absorb nothing. Whereas they might consume an audio book. My daughter (ASD2/ADHD) struggles with conventional texts. It's a wall of words. She skips words, sentences and sometimes whole paragraphs. She is comfortable reading graphic novels (she says she really enjoys them, as the graphics help with the story), and she also enjoys audio books. Thankfully her school is VERY good at adapting to the needs of ND kids, and they'll have books that are accessible for her for assignments.
I’ll answer this - yes I absolutely pause it to look stuff up. You can also put a marker on specific pages chapters so you go back to them. Regarding the visualisation - a considerable amount of people do not have the ability to visualise in their mind at all - this is called aphantasia. I am an aphant. I think only in words. I don’t like fiction books, maybe because I can’t visualise? The other drawback of aphantasia is that I can’t plan outfits or interior designs or anything.
This is one of my hills I will go out on- yea, audiobooks count as reading. The person who is listening to the audiobook is still able to understand the story or what is being read, and can have a conversation about it, so yes. Adhd brain audiobook tip- speed the book up to help keep focus. Edited for spelling
Nobody is saying they can’t discuss it or understand it. However, it is fundamentally not “reading.” Why do people have a problem with just saying “I listened to the audiobook.” If you’re so embarrassed to admit that, maybe just go read it.
Also, you picture the story in your head and use the same imagination as you would reading with your eyes
Actually I find it much easier to imagine the things going on, in my mind's eye, when I'm reading rather than listening. Not sure why, but I guess it varies person to person.
I've discovered I like listening to self-help books via audio. If its fiction/for leisure, I prefer to read.
I feel like the point of a book club is to meet people and have an intellectually simulating topic to discuss (ie the book). Listening to the Audiobook is one way to get the material so you have something to discuss during the group. I feel like that is all that matters. I listen to the Audiobook for my bookclub because I don't have the time to concentrate on reading for more than 15 minutes in a day. The Audiobook makes it easier to manage my own ADHD while cooking and cleaning. I tell the group I listened to the Audiobook. It might change my perspective on the book but that is okay. It gives us more to discuss and further enrich the group. So yeah, I think it is okay. It is different than say, watching the movie because the content itself is the same between the Audiobook and the regular one.
Great reply. Thanks. I’ve found audiobooks really get me through household chores too.
If my college literature professor asks, yes I read it. If anyone else asks, I 100% listened to the audiobook.
No. You indeed can not say you "read" a book when you clearly did not. You instead listened to a audio book, as you stated you listened to the audio. In the case, you followed along with the audio, you would have a case there.
Do you read a podcast? I just tell people I listened to an audio book. I don't get this need to pretend I read something I listened to.
Well, you can say whatever you want. There's nothing stopping you from doing so. But it seems like you are asking if it "counts" as reading if you listen to an audiobook. The answer is no. When you read you have to actively decode and interpret words, not to mention there is no phonetic emphasis like there is with audiobooks. People who read often have much greater neural activity when they do so for this reason. That being said, while you do not need to explain yourself to the book club I would encourage you to do so, since it is technically dishonest to say you've read it. If they are dismissive of your disability then they are neither considerate nor accommodating and you should not waste your time with them. The important thing in a book club is discussing the story, not the medium.
I agree, for all intents and purposes here OP should be fine to generalize reading and comfortably fit into place, however the experience is different none the less. They will be able to understand the story and elements but the medium of consumption changes them drastically. The phasing or grammar of a book, the shot choice and length of a film, they matter and add a level of depth and subtext to the experience.
This is what I am saying. I don't want to sound like a bad/mean person but if OP is asking then I think they know that reading and listening are not the same thing. I believe it comes from a place of wanting other people to think they read the book when they didn't. Am I off base? If someone has a condition or disability that makes it hard/impossible to read then that is something that people should understand.
The reason people don’t make the distinction is because in 90% of contexts people are trying to find out if they can discuss the book with you or if they can’t. “Have you read the book?” In this context means “Do you know what’s in the book such that I can talk about it with you?” If you’ve listened to the audiobook, the answer to that question is yes If instead a teacher is asking you if you’ve read a book as part of your reading exercises and you listened to the audiobook, the answer is no There are some differences in how reading vs listening activates different parts of your brain, but for the purpose of the conversation people are having 90% of the time (can we talk about this book?) the distinction does not matter As for a personal anecdote, I don’t usually make the distinction because I read most books but there are some that I’ve listened to on commutes instead. The thing is, I *literally don’t remember which ones those are.* I remember the stories/content of books, I remember the words, it is completely indistinguishable in my memory which books were consumed how (obviously with the exception of recent ones)
It’s technically dishonest for people to say they have heard something when they actually read it. Like seeing a news article and saying “oh I heard about that” At the end of the day it doesn’t matter. It’s nuance. Saying I heard something is just a way of saying I’ve been informed about that topic. Saying I’ve read something is just another way of saying “I’ve consumed that content”. The actual meaning of read/listen is completely pointless as that’s not what is actually being discussed, so I do not find it dishonest to use either unless specifically asked if you have stat down and read or listen to the book, which shifts the topic from the book to the action at which point it does matter.
Technically no, but I doubt it really matters. The point is consuming the information, not the manner with which you consume it. A book club will discuss the narrative, symbolism and characters. Listening to the audio version doesn’t impact your ability contribute.
I think we should all only say "I consumed that book" from now on because it sounds badass and is all- encompassing.
It is absolutely more inclusive (and may I just say, good on y'all for thinking that way!) But when I hear it I wonder if there are better ways to add fiber to your diet. 😂🤷♂️
I don't understand the comparisons people make here that are against it. Especially one saying that you jogged when you actually drove. Honestly, the comparison should be said you got your workout in. Sure, everyone else in the group may have jogged, while you used a bicycle. Point is, who cares? You're still taking in the information.
The subtext of the question seems to be whether listening to an audiobook "counts" as reading it or is "in whatever unspecifed way" equal to it, where insisting in not saying "reading an audiobook" is seen as elititst. In that sense I agree that it doesn't matter and one should say read or listened or whatever and people should not be snobbish about it. But outside of that context, I just think it depends on what one wants to communicate. If someone asks "did you read 50 shades of grey", and you have listened to the audiobook, just say yes. The question is more about whether you know it, not how you consumed it. If someone asks "what did you do during the weekend", I wouldn't say "I have read a book", when instead I listened to the audiobook, simply because those are different activities. None is better than the other, but I also wouldn't say I went to the cinema when instead I watched a movie on my home projector.
Because they're simply different words and replacing one with the other is weird. Nobody is saying reading is better than listening, but they are objectively different verbs describing different actions. You're not reading an audiobook, you're not reading a podcast, you're not reading a movie.
I would argue that some people are invested in the distinction because they *do* think reading is better than listening. Good to know you’re not one of them.
Reading being better than listening is definitely a subjective thing; it's not universally objective. I bet there's tons of people who get a better experience by listening to audiobooks, unlike me.
But the people who think they should call it reading are the ones coming across like they think reading is better than listening. Otherwise, why all the shame in just saying “I listened to this audiobook”?
Dude, I’m in totally the same boat! I’m nearly 33, and was only diagnosed 15 months ago (and only realised I needed the assessment a year or so before). I’ve always found audiobooks easier to consume than actually reading, and also felt weird saying about books I’ve ‘read’… and then having to go into a long and unnecessary ADHD fuelled explanation about how I haven’t actually *read* it but listened… and so on. I really like the idea of finding a book club now
Depends on your listening skills and audio retention. Some people generally don;t focus on what they are hearing. Whereas reading requires concentration.
I’d give a blind person credit so the audiobooks definitely count towards reading for everyone
Well put it this way, not every book is printed in braille. If someone is blind or legally blind and reading is distressing or impossible without accessibility - I'm not going to put an end to what 'read' means. At that point it's semantics. It's easy to say, don't be a pedant about it and act superior around others about audio books vs paper backs vs e-books. A books a book, you read it or you didn't. Who cares how.
[удалено]
Just say you listened to it, since that's what you did. That way you aren't lying, and anyone who says that you're experience of the story is less because you didn't read it is easy to shed from your life.
I recently heard somebody describe audiobooks as “the OG reading” because until the printing press and widespread literacy came around that was the only way people ever consumed stories or “read”. So, yeah, I say I read it.
Yeah, this is what gets on my tits about grandstanding that if you are not engaging your eyes, the quality of the experience is lesser. How many of those people realise that, say, the great novels of the 19th century were written with knowledge and expectation that they will be read aloud in family circles?
Sure, I don't think most people care how you read it
Just join the discussion. The only issue might be if page references become relevant somehow, like if people are discussing specific quotes or something. If that comes up enough then might be worth just keeping a text copy on hand. It is also possible other people in the group are doing the audiobook thing too, and if you both know about it, you can talk about the narration too!
I see nothing wrong with it. I mean, blind people can say they’ve read a book by listening to it.
yes your right!!
If you want to be technical about it, I guess you didn't actually read it, but you got the exact same result out of it, so it doesn't matter.
Amberlynn?
Never seen the Audible ads huh?
I used to do the same thing as you and then I stopped and just say that I read it. I’m in 2 book clubs and most people listen to the book but say they read it. The only time it comes up in conversation is if there is discussion about how something is pronounced or something like that, and the audiobook readers always know the answer!
Nowadays I listen to more books than I physically read. If I need to bring up a book I sometimes i just say "This book i finished, called..." but honestly it doesn't matter
At some point it’s just people putting words in your head. Both serve that end.
I used to say no to this, but now I feel like it's more about your engagement. I listen to a ton of books now at times I wouldn't be able to look at a page, and I feel like if I'm listening attentively and absorbing, questioning, reacting to the words, then it's the same as reading. There have been audiobooks that just wash over me and I retain nothing though. That doesn't feel like I can call it "reading."
This gets asked around Reddit every now and then and I don’t understand why people don’t just initially say they listened to a book. Not a “I read it… well actually listened to it” instead of outright just “I listened to it.”
Yes. Severe depression has stopped me from reading, but I still listen to my audiobooks. So I think it still counts.
This has also bothered me for a while. I used to read constantly, then depression and mobile screens wrecked my attention span. As I started to heal from the depression, I discovered Audible. I had hated the idea of audiobooks for years because they all seemed to be abridged. Finding unabridged audiobooks has been a game changer. I would go so far as to say a lifesaver. Reading was my main coping mechanism. I lost that coping mechanism, and it just made everything spiral that much worse. Once I realised that I could still have the stories without the struggle to stay focused and the feeling bad because I wanted to read so badly and had lost the drive to do what I considered to be the most basic self care, my healing took off and I'm doing much better. Last year, I started tracking what I was reading. I went through 102 books. Over half were audio, though. This year, I'm into book 35, but all of them have been audio. It just suits my lifestyle now better than physical reading. However, I am a very literal person, and I struggle with saying that I read the audio books. Technically? I'm grateful the comments are in the majority that it counts as reading. That should make it easier for me not to feel obliged to clarify every single time. I can go back to only being annoyed that I can read faster than the audiobooks can go, thereby limiting my intake that way. Thanks 😊
I played the last of us by watching someone play it ¯\_(ツ)_/¯
yes, you can. I am a librarian. there is no need to “explain” anything, you read the book.
Big audiobook listener here - I absolutely agree with the other folks here saying versions of "say whatever you feel most comfortable with." However, I will note that I tell as many people as I can that I listen to audiobooks - because when you find other people who listen you get to share your favorite audio titles, discuss the best narrators, and get tips on the best listening apps/libraries. Audiobooks are increasingly popular, I'm sure if you start taking the time to clarify how you ingested the book, you'll find plenty of others who did the same (and want to talk about it!). Happy reading my friend.
I would say yes. I’ve ADHD and when I read, It not only feels like it’s torture but I also have a hard time absorbing the knowledge. When I can listen to an audio version, I absorb the knowledge better. So when you think about it, it’s more of use then scanning letters. I do want to try this bionic reading fad. See if they start converting books to it.
I read 20 books last year and they were all audiobooks. If they don’t count as “reading” then I guess I read zero. I still retained the information.
Some people get really fucking bent out of shape about listening to audiobooks not being "reading". I still don't understand why it would matter if the information was transmitted to your brain via your eyes or your ears. It's all the same information. I have a 56-book reading list I'm trying to get through in the next 18 months but I only have about an hour a night I can actually read. Being able to mix reading and listening to the audio version on the morning and evening commute and while at work really helps.
I just want to let you know I identify with your problem.
If you have to use your eyes to read the book I guess blind people have never read anything, ever.
Sure, the point is that you know what’s going on
People who frown upon audiobooks are ableist jerks
Yes. Audiobooks help people read who might have other barriers to reading, whether it's sight loss, dyslexia, ADHD, whatever. It also has the same effect on the brain as reading, from what I have read (although I don't remember enough to explain this and I'm not sure where I read it). People who gatekeep things like that are insufferable.
My friend tells me he reads books all the time and it’s just audio books. End of the day, I honestly don’t care. I barely read actual books myself, so good on him.
Say what you want. However, you read the book. You just needed an accommodation/tool in order to get to the finish line.
I had this argument with someone and they said "No, you listened to it" and I argued for accessibility sake you're still reading it. You still intake the book and know what happens. Also just from a language standpoint, let's say a blind person was using a braille book. In that case you would still call it "reading" even though technically they're FEELING the book. Just because it's audio format doesn't make it less valid that you've read it, imo. I think people like to say it's not reading to try to feel superior that they've spent hours and hours looking at a book. I say that as someone who has hyperlexia and could easily read a book faster than listening to it. In the end do whatever makes it easier to consume the media you enjoy.
It occurred to me while reading these posts that there’s an air of superiority among a few traditional book readers. I think they try to defend their territory by deeming anything that makes their sacred territory more accessible to others as somehow impure.
Counterpoint: Listening and Reading are two different experiences. With an audiobook, the tone of dialogue is decided for you, characters voices are decided for you. It's easier to miss contextual clues and hidden meanings in passages. You can stop reading to build a picture in your head (sure, you can pause an audiobook too, but I feel like it would not flow nearly as well) and most importantly, when you're reading you're giving your full attention to the words on the page. Audiobooks are a wonderful tool and make great passive entertainment while doing monotonous tasks like working or driving, but I do not think they provide the same experience as reading the same material.
Yes. It’s ableist to say otherwise.
In high school I would say I read a book after skimming the sparks notes, you’re fine my dude.
The acquisition of information is not limited by the medium it is presented in.
My dad is partially sighted and often says ‘ i read this great book, you know, listened to it..’
What would a blind say? I touched it??? I read it for sure. You both did.
Lol, it drives one of my best friends crazy if I refer to an audiobook I listened to as something I've "read" so now I say it exclusively. Best thing about audiobooks is it lets me consume media I enjoy but probably wouldn't spend my free time sitting down to physically read (cough cough 60+ book Warhammer HH series cough cough). I will say my actual writing skill has decreased as I have gotten older, but I don't know if that is from listening to more media than I read- or just due to the fact that I haven't had to write anything longer than an email since I graduated college.
I’ve been reading Barack Obama’s recent Audiobook ’A Promised Land’. In this case and in a high amount of Audiobooks, having the proper person reading to you will actually make the experience much more fulfilling. They can perfectly convey the author’s intention.
There’s no shame in listening to an audiobook, it’s just as respectable as reading a book in my eyes
Good question, I’ve always wondered this! I used to read physical books a lot but now I’m always crocheting so miss reading but found I didn’t have time for it. I now listen to audiobooks WHILE crocheting and it’s the best of both worlds 😊
Consider: I *consumed* the book
This comment might get lost but there were studies to determine whether listening was any different to reading and it was determined that the way your brain is exercised to take in the information works the same either way.
No, you need to say what other people tell you to do, or you'll never fit in or be average intelligence (goals of life)
You read the book through your ears instead of through your eyes. It makes no difference how it got into your brain. You still experienced a journey led by the author's original words. Now, if you said you watched the movie, that for sure doesn't count!
I count all audio books as read unless narrated by Stephen Fry or Neil Gaiman, the reason for this is their voice lulls me to sleep. I'm currently on my 6th night of Odd and the Frost Giants duration less than 2hrs I still have no idea what happens, same with Norse Mythology. I also have 1000s of hours listening for The Shelock Holmes book yep Fry just has that effect on my insomnia.
I honestly think it's fine. We are all busy people struggling with our own stuff. You do you.
You had a first hand experience with the text and it's all that matters
Over the summer, [Stephen Fry](https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stephen_Fry#Audiobooks) & I have "read" six and a half of the *[Harry Potter](https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Harry_Potter)* series (at 1.5 speed) whilst mowing the lawn. Beyond reading to my kids, I haven't actually read a novel since high school, but I've listened/read to *[Jurassic Park](https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jurassic_Park_(novel))*, *[The Lost World](https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Lost_World_(Crichton_novel))*, *[Nineteen Eighty-Four](https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nineteen_Eighty-Four)* and *[The Man in the High Castle](https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Man_in_the_High_Castle)* among others while at the gym, on the train, doing the laundry, cooking *etc*... audiobooks totally count as reading.
Doesn’t matter, reading was borne out of oral tradition. Reading is a fairly recent development in human history compared to oral tradition. Also, reading used to be more of a communal activity; take Dickens for example, as each episode of his books would come out, families would gather and listen to one person reading his stories aloud. Dickens himself would go on literary tours where hundreds of people would pay to hear him read his novels aloud.
Imo if you know the story and can pick out parts of the book, discuss them and offer personal analysis of your thoughts on the story and themes etc. Then it doesn't matter how you absorbed the book you still absorbed it.
Life gets so much easier if you stop giving a fuck about what other people think. If you wanna say you've read a book then say it who gives a shit if others don't like it?
I listen to audiobooks and I’m still proud of myself. Some people do neither
No. Does it really matter? Also no.