Ran into Santa last night and he confirmed that yes, audiobooks are a valid form of reading, and anyone who thinks otherwise is on the naughty list.🎅🏼🎄
Comments
Log in with your Bluesky account to leave a comment
Of course they are! Reading is the EXPERIENCE, the totality of the story. One does not need to use one’s eyes to absorb the story. Otherwise what about those who ready by Braille? Or those who are legally blind? Anyone saying otherwise is throwing out some ableist nonsense. Happy Holidays! 😜
Highly recommend for audio books if you'd like to support a local store. I usually use my credits on newer books or pre-orders and hunt through the sales when I'm out of credits.
I don’t understand the negative attitude about audiobooks. I admit that it’s a different experience. But many people have visual issues and would not be able to read very much if there weren’t audiobooks.
This sentiment never fails to bring out the annoying pedants: “Actually, it’s only reading if it’s from the Reading region of France. Otherwise it’s only sparkling literature.”
It surely depends on how you listen to the audiobook. It’s certainly not the same as reading if you’re attempting to multitask and listen to an audiobook. I think that’s why people consider “reading” to be different.
It’s different because reading has a definition and listening has a definition. It’s fine to listen to an audiobook and it’s fine to read a book. It’s just a little lie for no reason. If someone read a book and told you they listened to the audiobook, you’d be like why would you lie about that?
Excellent, I shall continue to argue against the self appointed 'guardians' of words. It smacks of 'I learned and am good at paper books, don't take that away from me'.
It doesn't help that the Venn diagram of 'people that live books' and 'language luddites' has a small surface area.
I didn't say you were. I acknowledge the merits of dictionaries, media and the people I'm speaking to, I rarely defer to people that are sure they have the answer
One thing I like that Amazon did is if you buy the book on Kindle (tablet or the reader app) you can sync your book to the audiobook. You can read it while you're listening to it (helps buld reading skills), or you can have pick up where you left off on either.
I buy series for $1-$2 w/ digital $ I get on delayed shipping so they cost nothing
I have probably 1-2 years worth of reading & get more and more as I buy stuff
really great @ xmas
The subscription comes with 1 credit for any audiobook a month. But you can do the free month and get the two credits and cancel. Lol. You don't need to subscribe to listen. You can buy books on there without a subscription as well. With a subscription, you get discounts too.
The subscription comes for any 1 book a month you keep. I sometimes use it for preorders. The book can cost more than the subscription itself. You don't have to subscribe to use it.
My first audio book was my dad. He read to me quite often. He even read some of the Encyclopedia to me when he was looking up information. Newspapers, Readers Digest, Popular Mechanics and Dickens. Audio books are a reminder of those times.
If audio books aren’t reading, the Braille is not print and ASL isn’t a language. What the dominant culture says counts as text is a form of thought control. (Embossed, steps off soap box)
My current nursing job entails a lot of driving. It’s been a delight turning lemons into lemonade and reading books that have been in my queue for years. Current one is Robert Caro’s bio of Robert Moses.
What is wild to me about the continuation of this argument is that we have actual neurologic evidence. In brain scans, the experience of an audiobook is virtually the same as this experience of the written word. The only distinction is the level of activation in the visual centers.
Reading is reading, whether it’s with your eyes or ears. After “reading” a book, the information gleaned and ideas can still be discussed in exactly the same way. I personally cannot listen to a book; I am away with the fairies within the first minute, but I think it great if you prefer audiobooks.
I read 57 books this year. All of them audiobooks. I’m a mom of 4. Whoever doesn’t think it counts too bad, so sad. Counts for me and it counts for Santa so there’s that
Sure wish my son (who has many learning issues) could have shown this to his teachers! They were insistent that he READ everything, but we just got the audiobooks, & he'd ace any test questions about them.
Dictionary says this, common usage says that, my dad says the other.
I think everyone can agree that a story can be told without writing. To say that doesn't "count" as reading implies some kind of elitism that doesn't sit well with me.
It is also true that an audiobook does not need one's full concentration. But it *can* have one's full attention.
I personally don't like audiobooks because of that; my attention wanders in a way that can't happen when I'm reading on a page. I also don't like the way audiobooks force the pace.
3/
I like to be able to read the hard stuff slowly and go back over it if necessary. For this reason, I think, audiobooks tend to be fun and uncomplicated literature, but there is absolutely nothing wrong with that.
Of course, we can argue about anything on the Internet, why not this?
One thing I heard about and agree with is using audiobooks for the imposing pieces. I’m in the middle of War And Peace and would be hard pressed to just pick that one up.
Valid form of reading... without actually reading?
Don't get me wrong, they're a great tool if you are tired and don't have the capacity to read but they feal like a bit of a cop-out if that's all you do.
I believe this was tested under certain conditions. People who listen to audiobooks usually like to multitask like cook or drive or even work which is where the problem lies. Audiobooks are equal to reading when your total focus is in them, ie sitting on a chair/lying in bed immersed in the story.
No one is arguing that learning letters and sounds is not part of learning to read. What we are saying is the audiobooks and listening to the written word still has a place in reading comprehension.
Learning letters and sounds is only a small percentage of learning to read. As a former grade school teacher I can say that reading out loud to students has a massive impact on students reading skills. https://ascd.org/el/articles/the-hidden-power-of-read-alouds
No one is saying you can't. I work 60 hours a week, and I'm a full-time dad as well. I listen to audiobooks at work because I have no time to read. I guess I shouldn't get to know what my favorite author writes because you think listening isn't valid.
Give your kids a gentle nudge with read-along books!
Audio recordings with print books!
There were “Power Records” back in the ‘70s-80s.
And a lot of them are available as audio downloads with printable PDFs!
Kids are amazing, they can learn more than one thing in their lifetimes. 🤦🏻♀️ Teach them to read AND to listen. They're all worthwhile skills. While you're at it, teach them to not be closed minded about ways of doing the same things, maybe a tip you should take yourself.
I think you need to use better words then as you've said that to a few people so it's obvious your reply is reading not how you imagined it.
Maybe listen to a book about writing. 😜
Steven, I'm someone who struggled to read growing up - I applaud your initiative, but I promise that children can handle more than one lesson per lifetime.
IMO it's better to teach them that people have different ways of doing things, like reading books vs listening to them.
I apologize, re-reading my post I think I came off (a lot) more pointed than I had intended to. We read multiple books to our child every day, it’s something we are big on. But this whole “I’d rather them read than listen” just artificially pigeonholes peoples expectations un-constructively.
Read can also mean to understand something. Like when someone says "I read you loud and clear." You don't "listen loud and clear", do you? People can say they listened to audiobook, it's correct, but so is saying they read it. 1/2
Shall I change my wording to, I read 25 books this year and listened to 150 or I ‘went thorough/learned contents of’ 175 books just because of some weird semantics?
Why does it matter?
There’s nothing wrong with listening to audiobooks I think that’s great. You can get the same knowledge as if you were reading. However, it is not reading it’s listening. To me it’s about using the correct verbs of your actions.
I think read has evolved to be.what you do with a book. Not unlike play and game.
The other definitions are fine but language evolves, the rate and variation is one of English's strengths. Practically nobody says they listened to an audiobook, felt a braille book, or interpreted characters.
Words can evolve, but the main problem is that people feel shame when they say, “I was listening to a book,” instead of “I was reading a book.” This is why few people use the word “listening.” As readers, we should know the correct verbs of words instead of choosing ignorance.
While I have dozens (actually many more than that) hardcover books, I also use audiobooks and kindle. Audiobooks are great when the eyes are tired or you doing anything.
Comments
https://youtu.be/50SudSSuzJk?si=zPinVi3UJ6_DrBz9
I use it with my Kobo, but it is supposed to work great with the Kindle too.
It doesn't help that the Venn diagram of 'people that live books' and 'language luddites' has a small surface area.
I feel like this debate and discussion ultimately reveals that systemic ableism is what is at the root of such assertions.
I can speed read when I adjust the speed to 2x.
I did make it thru a 3 book series
It was a bit difficult though there were many things I missed & became confused
I can't just listen 2 them I have 2B doing something & my mind becomes distracted w/ what I am doing
Just can't afford that
I don't even subscribe to the book version
I buy series for $1-$2 w/ digital $ I get on delayed shipping so they cost nothing
I have probably 1-2 years worth of reading & get more and more as I buy stuff
really great @ xmas
I learn by reading books, and I love being in possession of them.
I never loan them to anyone I think will not return them.
Nevertheless, I have many friends who are audio learners, and that is great, too.
Individualised learning formats.
Wait a minute, why are we arguing about it? To feel superior to audiobook, uh, consumers? To make audiobook, uh, listeners feel better? 1/
I think everyone can agree that a story can be told without writing. To say that doesn't "count" as reading implies some kind of elitism that doesn't sit well with me.
/3
I personally don't like audiobooks because of that; my attention wanders in a way that can't happen when I'm reading on a page. I also don't like the way audiobooks force the pace.
3/
Of course, we can argue about anything on the Internet, why not this?
-Mongoose Man
Don't get me wrong, they're a great tool if you are tired and don't have the capacity to read but they feal like a bit of a cop-out if that's all you do.
But you can't learn to read, until you know what the letters look like.
Audio recordings with print books!
There were “Power Records” back in the ‘70s-80s.
And a lot of them are available as audio downloads with printable PDFs!
https://powerrecord.blogspot.com/?m=1
Maybe listen to a book about writing. 😜
IMO it's better to teach them that people have different ways of doing things, like reading books vs listening to them.
But my comment wasn't about that.
Do I know what’s in the book? Than yes, I’ve counted it as read.
Merry Christmas 🎄
"No, I listened to the audiobook." That's a correct statement. But so is, "yes"
Why does it matter?
The other definitions are fine but language evolves, the rate and variation is one of English's strengths. Practically nobody says they listened to an audiobook, felt a braille book, or interpreted characters.
We listen better when our hands are busy doing a task instead of sitting idle.
At least, that's what I tell my autistic self lol