Anonymous wrote:I consider audiobooks reading, but I also think that reading print and listening to an audiobook are two different skills. They both need to be developed to work for the reader, though most people probably have one that suits their learning style better.

The only thing I feel is that it would be sad for us as a culture to lose the ability to read the printed word in long form, something I think our society is moving towards. I think that deep down that's the fear that drives some print readers to rail against audiobooks.

I read over 100 books a year, all in hard copy book form, and I make a point to purchase most of them specifically because I worry that within my lifetime we will see a full transition to digital reading and publishers will stop printing books. So not the same as your audiobook vs printed word argument, but the same idea. I fear non-digital books will be phased out so I do my part to encourage printing of them.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Why does anyone care what anyone else thinks about this topic? Really, why?

I would never count audiobooks in my reading counts but I could not possibly care less if others do.

You cared enough to post about it! The problem is that insufferable people come on here all the time and bleat about audio "not counting." They just can't shut up about it and they refuse to consider that they might be wrong.

It just goes to show that there are a lot of well-read, but still very ignorant people.

This is not in any way true. Do some people, occasionally, make such posts here? Yes. But the book forum does not have enough daily traffic for any claim of people coming "on here all the time" and saying they "just can't shut up about it" to be true. I read this forum daily and this is not a hot button issue. Being somewhat of a discussion in one thread that started this week does not make your statement true either.

I consider audiobooks reading, but I also think that reading print and listening to an audiobook are two different skills. They both need to be developed to work for the reader, though most people probably have one that suits their learning style better.

The only thing I feel is that it would be sad for us as a culture to lose the ability to read the printed word in long form, something I think our society is moving towards. I think that deep down that's the fear that drives some print readers to rail against audiobooks.

Anonymous wrote:Why does anyone care what anyone else thinks about this topic? Really, why?

I would never count audiobooks in my reading counts but I could not possibly care less if others do.

There are some good reasons to care what others think, but the most important one is general literacy . If a parent or teacher doesn’t think audiobooks are reading, a lot of kids will just read less. That has negative consequences for components of literacy, like less practice in understanding complex sentences, not acquiring background knowledge and vocabulary, and overall less enjoyment in reading. Plus listening is actually an important component of literacy too. So, assuming we want to live in a literate society, it actually does matter what people think about this.

It is a different kind of reading, but yes

I seriously cannot fathom why people don’t consider audiobooks reading. Can you imagine knowing a book inside and out but saying “oh I haven’t read that book because I didn’t look at words.”

I bet some of these people think certain kinds of books doesn't count, too.

Graphic novels and manga? Comic books? Books of poetry? Books with lots of pictures and diagrams? Middle grade and Children's books?

Are those okay, gatekeepers?

Anonymous wrote:Why does anyone care what anyone else thinks about this topic? Really, why?

I would never count audiobooks in my reading counts but I could not possibly care less if others do.

You cared enough to post about it! The problem is that insufferable people come on here all the time and bleat about audio "not counting." They just can't shut up about it and they refuse to consider that they might be wrong.

It just goes to show that there are a lot of well-read, but still very ignorant people.

Why does anyone care what anyone else thinks about this topic? Really, why?

I would never count audiobooks in my reading counts but I could not possibly care less if others do.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Oh goodness.

Right?! 🤣 I somehow made it to "first, it's ableist". Sad story if this lady actually is a professor.

What gives OP, this is garbage.

WTF is wrong with you. She's correct. I think you are the garbage if you think ableism is to be laughed at. Get your head out of your rear end, PP.

Yikes, what’s with all the aggressive posts about audio books?

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Oh goodness.

Right?! 🤣 I somehow made it to "first, it's ableist". Sad story if this lady actually is a professor.

What gives OP, this is garbage.

WTF is wrong with you. She's correct. I think you are the garbage if you think ableism is to be laughed at. Get your head out of your rear end, PP.

Anonymous wrote:Oh goodness.

Right?! 🤣 I somehow made it to "first, it's ableist". Sad story if this lady actually is a professor.

What gives OP, this is garbage.

Reading this troll post made me want to listen to a book while I read something worthwhile.

Oh goodness.

A video of Arlan Hess, English professor and owner of a bookstore, explains why saying audiobooks don’t count as reading is harmful.

It’s short. Three main points.

https://www.tiktok.com/@citybookspgh/video/7139871144961658155

Going over the Oxford English Dictionary’s definition of “read.”

https://www.tiktok.com/@citybookspgh/video/7276919461448371502

We all love books around here. Let’s celebrate a love for reading instead of telling people their way doesn’t count.