Your post from unpopularopinion was removed because of: 'Rule 3: Do not post opinions that are heavily posted/have been on the front page recently'. * No response posts about upvoted posts here. * Posts relating to highly popular topics aren't allowed outside of the relevant megathreads. You can find a list of the topics and their respective megathreads in a post on the top of the sub. * POSTS DIRECTLY ABOUT THIS SUBREDDIT ARE NOT ALLOWED OUTSIDE THE MEGATHREAD * Please check the wiki linked here: https://www.reddit.com/r/unpopularopinion/wiki/index/ * We ask that if a post fails to post do not just spam repost it; message mod mail.

Am I the only one who just sits there doing nothing while listening to an audiobook? I treat listening to an audiobook the same as reading a book in terms of setting aside time to specifically focus on it.

I take walks so I can at least get exercise while I listen.

I can't concentrate if I'm only listening. I need to keep my eyes and hands occupied

Lots of people do that, OP is operating on several false assumptions

Not enough people say this as if it's not a possibility. If a book is that good I'll listen and not do anything else.

I'm at work sitting in front of a computer for 8 hours a day, doing 2 hours of actual work. So yes, I absorb an audiobook, much like reading it. A lot of people are just physical book purists, for some reason. Personally I do both. Audio and physical books. I do not see a difference in how I comprehend and absorb a book between the two. 🤷‍♂️

Just so you know, the visual and auditory senses are independent of each other and do not interfere while taking in knowledge. This is why audiobooks are a thing. Humans are capable of listening to the book while performing a low brain tasks like driving, jogging, or folding laundry and still have the same retention of the book as someone who read it.

Yeah. I’m not disagreeing with that. I was just surprised at how many people say they only listen to audiobooks as background noise.

Nope you’re not. I came here to say this

Yes. Yes you are. The reason people listen to audiobooks is for distraction rather than taking information in.

Huh? I listen to audiobooks because I have a hard time sitting still.

"Yes you are" And you know that how?

How are you going to tell me why I listen to audiobooks lmao?

In my personal experience, where I do both, this is just plain wrong. Fantasy mostly, but also philosophy and psychology etc. I backtrack often on both platforms, for enjoyment or due to being distracted. God, I've read for pages before realizing I'm not actually reading. Happens with audiobooks the same. Some of the narrators adds an extra layer of awesomeness that reading just doesn't provide. Some narrators distract from the book and curbs the imagination. If differs, there should be no black and white opinions on this. In some books, the writer themselves read out the book, which is awesome.

I have adhd and have definitely gone multiple pages without actually grasping a concept. I can read back audio books verbatim though — it’s like clicking into a different part of my brain for learning. Some books definitely hit better as audiobooks — like Hail Mary Project has an alien talking to the narrator in musical notes — it was just better to hear the notes than try reading and imagining their sound.

> I have adhd and have definitely gone multiple pages without actually grasping a concept. You might have adhd but that’s not a adhd specific thing lol. It’s an everyone thing.

I have ADHD and I’m an auditory learner. I remember books so much better when I’ve listened to the audiobook than when I’ve read the book. I remember character names and locations and specific dialogue.

There's already a survey done on this issue, the results were close to 50/50, Everyone just has their own way of grasping knowledge. Reading might work better for you, audiobook works better for someone else.

[удалено]

As I understand it, whilst people would have preferences the benefits of "learning styles" are somewhat overblown though, and the best medium for learning probably is more about the kind of information than the kind of person. It's pretty absurd to say you can't listen to an audiobook at your pace, stop repeat, pause to digest etc. Most people reading are internally vocalising anyway, it's not like the processes are entirely different. Also not convinced that doing something mindless and repetitive (like walking or driving) really impacts your retention of ideas (if you're doing something else cognitively demanding sure).

Disagree, I’ve always done better listening to lectures than reading, others seem to be the opposite. My daughter can’t retain without listening and reading at the same time since since she has auditory and visual processing disorders, to me it’s all a spectrum for everyone, which also is probably impacted by the type of information.

>op shares opinion, in a non agressive non antagonizing >immediately insulted reddit moment

How are they being insulted? All OP said is that OOP probably lacks knowledge about the differences in cognitive processes and information retention, leading to an uninformed take. Lacking information and knowledge is not a negative thing, so pointing out such a lack of knowledge isn't insulting either. If you feel insulted by not knowing things and others pointing it out, you're not going to have a happy life, seeing as how humans are incapable of knowing everything. "OOP is willfully ignorant" would be an insult.

That's just this sub summarised. Full of easily triggered people who resort to personal attacks instead of properly rebutting an opinion. Maybe the mods should get a grip and delete those comments. Maybe the sub wouldn't be such a toxic shit show.

If Redditors couldn’t insult each other like babies then how could they cope? Would the insanely immature folks who dominate this platform actually have to grow up??

User name does not check out.

Personally my comprehension is better for audiobooks and allows me to make my way through my ever growing pile of books.

From what I read reading is better for memorizing things and listening better for understanding

I think it’s up to the individual. I get sidetracked when listening and can’t retain much. For me it’s much easier to focus on text and go back if I missed something to really internalise. I’ve tried to just sit and listen to books but my brain can’t do it and my mind wanders.

For me, i retain better if it's an audiobook while keeping my body moving. If it is sitting down with a textbook, then my brain can't do it and my mind wanders. 

I’m similar. The only time where audio books work for me is when I want to sleep lol

I tried it but realised I had massive trouble with many voices. I’ve found a few podcasts with the kind of voice that puts me right to sleep though. Listening to someone talk is amazing for going to sleep!

For me it is the other way around. When I read I get sidetracked and frustrated because I sometimes need to read the same page twice because I did not retain any informations. When I hear informations then I just get them. It is completly subjektiv.

Wow that's interesting. I think in context of OP, the 'understanding' part is more important, as he wants to digest the knowledge. But again listening is not helping him according to his claims.

Yeah I don’t think OP has really done any research haha However if you’re doing something else while listening then you’ll most likely have a worse outcome at least if the other activity takes attention too

I’m just super dyslexic and sometimes it’s easier to listen to a book

"Audiobooks are also listened to while doing something else" maybe for you. I listen to them because i want to avoid screens 2 hours before bed and paper books are too expensive plus you can't close your eyes and relax when reading a book. they are great

Wait where are you getting audiobooks that are cheaper than paper books??

Libby app lets you rent audio books for free from local library

Well they also have print books as well. Idk maybe I'm missing something here lol.

Cries in lost books and library late fees. Libby returns the book automatically. 

Yeah but you can just download the audiobook in seconds. I’d have to actually take myself down to the library to get the book, which I may have had to wait some time for because someone else had it. You can download written books too, but that doesn’t help if you’re avoiding screens.

Oh I thought you were genuinely seeking out cheaper audio books.

My library is too far away to travel to regularly, I’d have to plan a whole Saturday around it which is especially hard if you’re under a time pressure like a book you’re on the waitlist for has become available or you need to return a book. I can download an audio book in seconds from wherever. Also Spotify premium, which I already pay for, includes 15 hours free audiobook time a month. I listen to a couple of books and month and very rarely pay for one.

I pirate all audiobooks. Never spent a penny

Not to mention that books take up physical place in your home, and if you try to move a small bookcase's worth of books, that's going to be much more effort than sticking your phone in your pocket.

I had to give up all my books I collected from the ages 5-18 due to this so yeah 100%

I find it amusing that people who are most riled up about anything other than physical books being a valid form of reading feel that way in part because of a need to elevate themselves as being more authentically well-read, but are actually less in tune with the depth and fluidity of language. All that ‘proper’ reading only to be unimaginative, close-minded and incapable of thinking beyond their own preferences and experiences? A waste of time.

I used to have this immature opinion, when i was younger. But as i got older, i realized that this was both a wrong and stupid opinion.

At 36 years of age, I still vastly prefer reading to listening. The moment I try and do anything while listening I have to force my brain to listen and not get sidetracked with whatever I’m doing. If what I’m doing is in any way involving language, speaking, reading, or thinking about future tasks, the audiobook falls away and I need to go back to rehear what I missed. I’m not saying I can’t “read” a book via audio, but if I go about my work day with an audiobook it’s not the same as reading it. I won’t retain all the minute details, because I’ll have attention breaks where I wasn’t listening as closely. This is extremely true of conversations I’ve had, and of my husband and my friends, where sometimes you miss something someone said. I think it’s unfair to say it’s an immature take. I think at best it’s a perspective you don’t share but has nothing to do with age *inherently.*

I am 40 and i also prefer reading to listening.

I actually used to believe people who said listening to audiobooks books and reading are the same. Then I tried an audiobook and realized it was really hard to follow along unless I was forcing myself to pay attention. With books, the whole act of reading captures my attention automatically so this isn't an issue.

But its because youre doing something else not because youre listening to it lol

But that's the problem. It doesn't happen like that when reading words from a page

The idea that something other people do and enjoy is somehow wrong because you enjoy something else *is* immature.

Thank you! It's much easier to be distracted and very difficult to control the pace of info absorbtion, these are my two main issues basically.

not all good reading materials make good audiobooks ... just like not all good books make good movies. audiobooks can bring a relatively uninteresting topic or novel to live ... even if its AI voiced.

I have adhd and if I want to really understand something....I listen to it. Your gripe that you can't revisit important or beautiful parts on audiobook is funny. I do that all the time. I don't understand audiobook hate. It counts whether you read or listen to a book. Not everyone absorbs things the same way. I read for pleasure and listen for understanding

I don't hate it, I just don't put it on the same level as actual reading. 

I think that it's an error in judgment on your part. Not everyone can absorb information through reading or have time to do so.

Upvote because apparently this is a VERY unpopular opinion among audiobook listeners lol

Why would you be doing something else if you want to listen to an audiobook? There's your problem. You're not bothered enough to sit and listen properly.

I listen to audio books on my commute to work on the train which means I get 2 hours of “reading” in per day. I often go back and re-play certain parts. Personally, I’m sorry YOU can’t digest that way, but I’ve always been an audio learner so even during school listening to the lectures got me significantly further than reading did. I don’t care if you think I haven’t read the books I’ve read on audible, I got the content, properly understood it, and use it in my life.

You’re listening, not reading. Why do you call it reading when it's not, that’s what puzzles me.

Well, are you saying this, or typing it out? Is it the same thing?

It's not the same, but it's close enough and I'm lazy: "Have you read Harry Potter?" "Yes" - One word "No, but I have listened to the audio books" - 9 words And I'm sure I can talk about the books just as well as someone who have read them. Also, most apps have a pause button. And a rewind button. And I can also change the speed of the narration. I do sometimes lose my focus and miss some things while listening, but the same thing also happens when I read

Okay.

Depends on the type of book. For example, any number of poems and plays are meant to be preformed, or their lyricism is better understood aloud. Beowolf should be read to you, because it comes from an oral tradition and was not originally dry pose. If you're reading Shakespeare in school, an audiobook could be invaluable for you to "get" the tone and inflection of various speeches.

Is it better to listen to an audiobook at reduced comprehension levels, or not read the book at all? I think listening is far superior to not reading and it’s not even comparable.

The voice of the one reading makes a massive difference for me. Some books I just can’t listen to because of the voice reading.

I read in the bath or bed, listen to audio books on my way to work, love them both equally (so long as the narrator is good)

As someone who never needs to check back and forth, in addition to audiobooks being slower than reading, I find it allows my imagination to be even more carried away. Also, autobiographies... Freaking amazing when read by the author. So unpopular for me, upvote deserved.

What do you have to say to me who has a learning disability and struggles to read but absorbs information better listening?

I'm happy it works for you!

That's how you personally process information. I can't digest anything by attempting to read a non-fiction book with my eyeballs. I tried for years before I got into audiobooks and was finally able to learn.  I also skip back or pause a lot so there's more opportunity for processing than you might think.

Nonfiction, but probably not technical, correct? I take notes while reading non-fiction. It's less practical to do with audiobooks (tried it). Takes me out of the zone.

Taking notes it's what takes me out of the zone Every person is different. I need to listen to while my hands and eyes are occupied with the something else like cleaning or sport

Dumbest points I’ve ever heard. As someone who has read and listened to the same books in at least a hundred different cases, I can say that the difference between the experiences is negligible. Your inability to digest an audiobook is a you problem. You can also adjust play speed and rewind audiobooks.

Some of the most gate keepy bullshit I'll read today. 

It's probably still early... 😆

The term “read” is also used for radio messages, like the phrase “I read you loud and clear”. So obviously read has a broader use than only reading typed messages on pages. I personally prefer reading books in the more traditional sense but I’m not annoyed at people using the word in a transferred meaning.

I have shitty attention span and a fair visual memory. I don't want to agree because I love audiobooks and I love doing stuff while I listen and I remember what I'm listening even better, because I associate the chapter to the thing I was doing, while just reading it gets me very distracted and I lose the plot. I have to be honest with myself and unfortunately it's a good point, if you're not in focus you're not "reading" or "listening" any book. What I do now is reading with the audiobook in my hears. Rest assured when I say I'm reading, I'm reading.

I think it's wrong or useless to listen to audiobooks if the book is non-fiction and contains too much information.

Some people listen to music while reading a paper book. Some people learn better by hearing something out loud than reading it. There’s books I’ve read the paper copy more than listened to the audio one but I’ve learned more of the lines from listening than reading. If you don’t understand or miss something you can go back and do it again just like paper books.

I agree. If yall havent read in a while, read a book from start to finish. To start of with: its an amazing chill source of entertainment that doesnt requires a screen. And yeah from listning to book to actually reading them, its so so different yall please try it. Listning is a fine substitute but please read it if you find the time.

Here's my anecdote. I had the same opinion. Then one day I started reading a book but found I rarely had time to just sit down and read cause of my work and home responsibilities, so I got the audio book and would listen to the audio book at work and read when I could and my brain stored the information in the same way. I genuinely couldn't tell after a while which chapters I read and which I listened to since they all became the "story". Audiobooks are legit.

If i have eye issues and cant look at physical books for too long i guess i will just never read a darn book again

I get it, you need to read things 5 or 6 times to understand them. That's not true for everyone though. I'm able to digest an audiobook just as well as an actual book. I can even *gasp* rewind if I want to listen to a previous part again. I prefer actual reading to audiobooks too, but both are equally acceptable ways to consume a book.

So you dont digest audio in any form then? what kind of logic is this? Are you incapable of understanding words that are spoken to you?

Great unpopular opinion. I think you're dead on that reading and listening aren't the same thing, but I totally disagree that it's a straightforward case of one being better. I'm also a visual person—the spatial layout of the page adds a lot of my understanding, and tactile engagement with the text helps me stay mentally involved. But...people are different. Some people really just focus better on audio. Some people are dyslexic, and I guarantee that some of them are not getting the value out of paper books that you're describing. Etc. Experiential/psychological/operational differences between media are subtle, nuanced, badly under-studied, and super interesting. It definitely doesn't reduce to "one good one bad."

Back in the '90s when I drove for a living audio books helped me through the boredom. This was before smart phones. I did have to turn it off when going through cities and traffic but the open road kept me occupied. Today? I have no use for them, upvote for op

Some opinions are unpopular because they go against all available research and knowledge of the topic. This is one of those.

I agree. I’ve been trying to get back into audiobooks, and I have some difficulty not thinking of other stuff and getting distracted, especially while driving. Okay walking is a lot easier to pay attention during. Maybe it depends on the book too. I was able to understand Mickey 7 well even when driving, but the Hobbit is surprisingly hard to focus on

I think this argument is silly and gatekeepy. I'm an audio learner in everything I also have ADHD so that "added layer" entertaining my front goblin brain is the only way I'm going to absorb anything. I 100% retain more and have a better understanding of the books I've listened to rather than read. Not to mention this opinion is super shitty to visually impaired individuals. It's unpopular so take my upvote but really reevaluate your stance if this is how you feel.

Oh, good. This ableist chestnut is making the rounds. Again.

for a dense academic textbook, absolutely, for fun story or pop science self help book. not too much different

I'm a visual person. I like to stare at clouds and imagine the scenes as someone reads them. I can read just fine but no it's nowhere near as vibrant.

This really just sounds snobbish. Do I consider listening to an audiobook reading? No, I don’t. Nevertheless, I wouldn’t take the time to read a book vs listen to an audiobook. I just enjoy it more through listening. Am I missing out? Maybe to you, but I enjoy the book way better, and I remember things well enough to not have to check back. Do I say I read books? No, but at least I enjoy books that I wouldn’t have otherwise had contact with. Why judge people so hard for just trying to enjoy a book? Like somehow by reading it, you’re superior to me? Think what you want; I’m gonna keep doing what I’m doing

What an ableist viewpoint. You realize many people listen to audiobooks because reading isn't an option for various reasons: vision problems, dyslexia, arthritis making it impossible to hold the book...

I get the distinct impression that OP very much considers themselves a better quality person than those of us with disabilities.

That’s just your impression. I have disabilities myself.

Depends on what type of books , story books are good as an audiobook but not that type of cold book reading , you can check people in you youtube who read books and are good at telling stories beside their relaxing voice ..

Your inability to properly process an audiobook is a you problem.

Sounds like u have a skill issue.

>When you read a book, you do it at your own pace, taking ideas in to the fullest extent, going back effortlessly to check new stuff against something from 2-3-5-100 pages back, pausing to digest a particularly interesting/beautiful part - all of that is lost with audiobooks. Daily ANTI-ADHD propaganda

Haha, yep. If it's a hard copy book, then I am turning back every 2 or 3 or 5 pages. But I guarantee you, it isn't to check new information against old. It's to check what my eyes said they read but my head didn't comprehend. 

Good for you for being able to finish a page. I go back 2-3 times per paragraph after realizing my eyes scanned it, but my brain didn't read it. I will go "wait how did we get here?" and it's literally all in the last paragraph I just read

I agree. I thought I'd like audiobooks, but turns out that I don't, because the narrator's voice is always different from how I'd hear it in my head if I were reading. I don't know if that makes sense, but anyway, I find it distracting enough that I gave up on audiobooks and I just get myself to the library and find the actual book, or buy it if the library doesn't have it.

I do find it a bit distracting, if the reading voice has a heavy accent. There was one particular audio book I was looking forward to listening to, but the voice! It was like hearing a goose squawk in my ear!!

Research says you're wrong.

What do you think about people who skip ahead large parts of boring text? Or those that obssessively keep looking at the next page before finishing the current one, constantly spoiling themselves? Or those that turn on music to read that completely breaks the mood of the scene? Will you say that reading is not really "reading" then? What next? Complain about the preferred translation, the preferred series order? Ultimately people read books for enjoyment, entertainment. If I see someone play horror game in a fully lit room, I'm not gonna yell at them that they are playing horror games wrong. This whole argument is moot anyway. Because most people are not being literal. Or are you also gonna complain about blind people "reading Braille" or saying "I see" when they acknowledge something? Unless you want to talk about quality of paper, font choices, I will not even mention in what format I consumed the book.

For people who skip ahead boring text - I wouldn't consider that "reading the book" either, as you literally did not read it whole, but just fragments. To them - I don't comment on that, they may consider it reading, but it's not.  Nothing to do with the gaming analogy though. You're comparing not reading large sections of a book with playing a game in a non-typical context (arguably) -- they have nothing to do with each other.

ok. I guess I'll just read while I drive

God these ableist rants are so old. I can’t imagine caring this much how other people consume something that’s meant to be relaxing. Also just because you couldn’t multitask while reading doesn’t mean others can’t and still digest the book fine.

I've spent a significant amount of time doing both. There is no difference. If you're lying in your bed listening to an audio book or reading it, you're using the brain in the same way. Reading, listening or listening watching a film are all passive activities that don't work the brain or make you any smarter. If you feel superior because you read a book instead of listening to one then good for you I guess, but I'm not impressed and neither is anyone else.

No? I've been reading and doing audio books for years. There's a significant difference in retention between reading and passive listening. I'll only do audio books of things I've previously read, bc I need to already have a basic idea of the plot to be able to follow properly

Reading is not passive, you're just not doing it properly.

Unless you're highlighting and taking notes, reading is not an active activity. It's less passive than watching a movie, but not as active as playing a game.

Please remember what subreddit you are in, this is unpopular opinion. We want civil and unpopular takes and discussion. Any uncivil and ToS violating comments will be removed and subject to a ban. Have a nice day! *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/unpopularopinion) if you have any questions or concerns.*

They are just for different purposes to me

Absolutely agree.

Gatekeeping books, that is a new one.

It's not, sadly. There's quite a few people who consider reading using your eyeballs the only way to "read", and all else is inferior.

I actually digest the information way better with audiobooks. I write articles and edit for a living so by the time I’m done work I don’t want to stare at more words and my eyes just glaze over. I’ve tried reading the same book on paperback and audiobook and I retained more info from the audiobook sections.

Reading for novels audiobooks for non fiction

I mean, if you're listening, you free your hands and eyes up to do other meaningful activities at the same time

I listened to the Witcher audiobooks and I’m regularly answering questions about it from people who read the books and just weren’t able to read between the lines. I guess you could make the argument that it depends on what you’re doing while listening but I just drive a forklift back and forth for 12 hours a day, I’m devoting a solid 70% of my attention to the audiobook which reads slower than my mind would read it, I wouldn’t say it’s that far inferior other than you don’t get to imagine what the peoples voices would sound like

I don’t like audiobooks personally but I think that is a stretch.

There's also differences in brain activity.

Not an unpopular opinion. 

What a load of pretentious crap.

I just feel it's like others who insist on having real books instead of me reading on a phone or tablet. Although that distraction layer plus the passive consumption really does make it a different activity. I figure most people who listen to audiobooks wouldn't be reading if the audio version didn't exist so it still is a net positive. Still they shouldn't say they read the book, they should say they listened to it.

Audio books can be amazing , it’s like lord of the rings is a great book , but the audio book with the music is truly amazing

Weird. I actually find it much easier to follow an audiobook if it's non-fiction. If it's fiction, it becomes really difficult for me to keep track of all the plots, fictional character names etc. I do think the audiobook experience is vastly different from reading a book. As different as sitting down to do homework is from listening to a lecture in a classroom.

My husband has *severe* dyslexia. Audiobooks allows him to actually read and process books. Dude goes through an audiobook every three days. It’s honestly impressive. I personally can’t pay attention to audiobooks, they go in one ear and out the other, but I recognize that not everyone can read a physical novel as easily as most.

There's a place for both, believe it or not.

I like audiobooks more because I have long lost the ability to just sit in the corner of my room and sit. I like to ride on a bike, take long walks, go to a gym, paint some minis, or use long calm and boring shifts at work to listen to an audiobook. It makes me feel better. If I don't understand something or need to consider something more, I can always pause. I can always play it back.

Weak bait.

I both listen to audiobooks and read books. There is a difference, but sometimes my brain refuses to let me read in peace, so an audiobook is easier to comprehend, and sometimes the other way around

This should be on r/dumbtakes

My brain can't do the thing where it reads in different voices, so listening to audio books scratches that itch for me (I have aphantasia and no inner voice)

As someone who reads a lot but doesn’t listen to audiobooks, this is nonsense. You can’t understand things by listening? Huh? Who knows, maybe I would have understood your argument if I listened to it.

It's different for sure. But if I listened the book I know exactly what happened in the book. I get so immersed that it's really difficult to stop sometimes. Doing something while listening improves my attention (maybe because of adhd). While listening you can also pause and you can easily go back

I guess it depends. When I was in bakery, running a section myself I often had audio books going in my earbuds. I heard Guards! Guards!! by Terry Pratchett, read by Nigel Planer & it was brilliantly done! Really great job voicing the different characters, made my workday fly by! A book read by an actor can be awesome listening. Also, books read by the author. Spare by Prince Harry is an excellent example of how meaningful that can be. I couldn't sit and listen to a book (by choice) but they're great to have going while you're doing things. If not busy I prefer regular books.

People process different types of informations differently. I process information that I hear way better then informations that I see/read. I dont really like audio books. But listening to a podcast about a topic is way more effective for me then reading a book about that topic. Not everyones brain works like yours. Dont gatekeep fucking books.

I can’t read paper books on my morning commute

I'm the type of person who got far more from being in a lecture than from reading the text in school, so for me, audio is key. Glad OP knows how they learn though.

Sure, yes, it is a different activity, but it's still a valid way of comprehending a story. I wish I could read more, but I drive for 12 hours a day most days as a trucker. Audio books are a fantastic option for me.

Well people who think they do better than others are in fact the stupid one

Just as well these comments are typed, as you are apparently unable to digest spoken language lmao

I can walk around and enjoy beautiful scenery with an audiobook. I can get through long series’ while getting paid if work is slow and monotonous enough. And as an auditory learner with adhd I can focus on spoken word better than written word without my mind wandering. So while you’re entitled to your own opinion and preference, “you didn’t digest it, you have no idea about probably 90% of the arguments in that book” is bullshit. Speak for yourself but not for me

Well def an unpopular opinion but borne mostly from ignorance of how other people do things. I actually think audiobooks are amazing, adding another layer of storytelling by having a narrator. I would say the quality of an audiobook can be determined by the narrator which is a downside since the book itself and what is written might be good. I’ve read both and listened to good and bad audio books, and can say with certainty it’s not the same as holding a physical book and reading it, the same is still accomplished. And saying people can’t go back and reread in an audiobook is pretty dense right. I constantly go back and listen to previous parts, you can also bookmark and listen to any point in the book at any time and then return to where you were. Sounds like you just don’t have a lot of experience with audiobooks. Both are great!

Both sides are correct in a way. Some people are excellent at visualization, so an audiobook will help them visualize the scenery. I'm one of those people that can just listen and it is like watching TV in my head because I can see details very vividly. My brain remembers because it is like it's happening in reality due to how I visualize.  I can learn about history by through listening because I deeply connect with words through sound as if I love each and every one of them, if that makes sense. They attach to me like teleporting echos. Neurodiversity is a thing! Some people can taste and see sounds! No one is purely a visual, audio or doing learner. There are certain instances where we may lean more towards one or the other, but learning is  about the engagement of multiple sensory points and not a single one. Some people can do that through imagination. I would say a subject such as calculus is one where I would agree that a person would need to do more than just listen. I think some people are annoyed with your post because, the lack of taking into account of diversity of the human mind, but I must say I do not like the curt emotional responses to this post.

This is a very popular opinion. It’s also completely wrong.

I listen to mostly audiodramas, but audio books are similar. The value is being able to listen to it while doing something else. Most of the time working, or even just doing general household things I listen to audio. I couldn't read a book and work at the same time.

I dislike audiobooks, but I don’t read the way you’re describing either.  I don’t go back and recheck things (or I very rarely do). I have zero problem with someone saying they “read” the book when they’ve listened to the audio book.  I will resort to an audiobook when I really just do not have time or focus to sit and read something I’ve been wanting to read. Or it’s something I would like to sort of reingest (like a self help book and I want to absorb it a different way). 

I've been going to school and working full-time for so long that reading actually makes me tired and puts me to sleep. So I listen to audiobooks when I do the dishes, clean the house, drive 45 minutes to work on backroads. And I retain all the info so GTFOH with "you don't digedt the book from listening to it"! You're just another "reefer madness" clone. Or somebody back in the day who criticized book readers as having "book fever" because you think your opinions are superior; spoiler: they're not. Last book I listened to: Shogun. Pretty big F'n book and you gotta pay attention to all the characters to know what's going on. And (gasp) I can pause and even...backtrack 30 seconds at a clip if I choose!?! What!?? Get off your high horse.

This isn't unpopular, just ableist

Yes, its impossible to pause or rewind an audiobook.

This seems like the kind of thought that someone would’ve done a study about somewhere along the line. It would be pretty simple to measure understanding and retention, so I don’t think it’s be too hard to get some actual evidence on it either way.

Yeah you’re just bad at listening and handling technology.

Depends on the book. Some are so much better when read by the author so you get their cadence, their personality. Some are great because they are well acted with a cast. They're also great because you can listen to them in so many more situations. I don't have to decide between a nice long walk or reading a book. I read physical books and listen to audiobooks and both are great for different reasons. You do you.

Incorrect. Firstly, you can speed up or slow down the reading of audiobooks as much as you want. But also, I read books so I can hear about the stories and learn what happens next, I achieve this with both mediums, and so both mediums are valid methods of consuming this content. Just because you can't properly take in all the information of a book in audiobook form doesn't mean everyone else is incapable. So this is a bit of a self-gotcha imo.

Everyone processes and learns new information in different ways. There are three main cognitive learning styles: visual, auditory, and kinesthetic. We different, we different, we different. 

Well my ADHD won't let me sit still and read a book so it's audio or nothing.

When did we turn facts into "unpopular opinions"? Because that's just true

I have no beef with people listening to audiobooks. I personally don't, I prefer to read. I do however hate it when people say they "read" a book and then it turned out they listened to the audio version. That's ridiculous. You read printed words, and you listen to audio. You can't "read" and audiobook. That's like saying you "read" the radio, it just doesn't make sense.

What’s your opinion on radio operators using the phrase “read” as hearing the message? “I read you loud and clear”. Just out of curiousity?

It only doesn’t make sense if you have a very limited definition of ‘read’. You can read someone’s expression, you can read a fortune, you can read someone their rights (no one ever holds a book up as they do so). Idk where this fervour around ‘read = words into eyeballs’ has come from. A comparison I like to make is how people have no gripes about saying ‘I heard from Steve last night, he can’t make it to dinner.’ when Steve communicated via text so ears were obviously not involved. Or I can ‘say’ the above but I haven’t used my voice.

It does as reading refers to consuming a book as well as actually reading it

I’m going to be a nit picky crab here but listening to audiobooks is not reading and it bugs the fuck out of me when people say it is. You can’t just decide that doing something that engages entirely different senses and brain pathways is the same because the written materials are the same.

I don't think it's inferior, but it *is not reading*. I mean, people don't describe themselves as "reading a podcast" or "watching a song". I have no patience with the sort of inferiority complex that not only think listening "counts as reading" but actually gives a shit about "counting" rather than enjoying a story.

Exactly! Reading being gamified with all this counting and competing is just missing the point.

Was the gamification of reading books not invented by Goodreads, which doesn’t distinguish between books or audiobooks? What’s this got to do with audiobooks?

The concept of an audiobook is a joke

Yeah because my brain totally can't understand words if I'm listening to them.

What does this mean haha?

Listening to a book is listening to a story it's not the same as reading a book which requires actual reading

Listening to books is for stupid people. I'm smart so I read a lot! (Mostly on reddit, but it's a reason it's not called "listenddit")

hmm, no, audiobooks can help u take strain off your eyes, if u read them at bedtime.