Do audiobooks count as reading?

TinyFroggy’s thread reminded me of a conversation with my friend about audiobooks and whether listening to an audiobook counted as reading.

What do you think?

I think if you’re taking in the story and following what happens then it definitely counts. My friend thinks this too but she can’t listen to new books otherwise she loses track of the plot so can only listen to books she’s read before. I think it’s unfair on those with poorer vision to not count them, if you listen to Harry Potter or read it you’re still getting the story and know exactly who Voldemort is either way.

I definitely think as long as you're ACTIVELY listening to the book and not passively doing so, it counts. If you can't talk about it after you're finished listening it can't count because you have no idea what its about haha.

I guess it still counts as reading. The benefit of reading is not the pupil muscle stretching but your brain processing, evaluating and thinking. With the audiobook I think it does the same :)

No, because you're not reading, you're listening.

Audiobooks are the contemporary equivalent of the spoken radio soap operas from pre-TV times,, the only "reading" act in audiobooks comes to the bit you're sorting them by their titles on Spotify, for example :P

"My friend thinks this too but she can’t listen to new books otherwise she loses track of the plot so can only listen to books she’s read before."

Showing how bland is the "aborbing" capacity of audiobooks comparing to the physical books! Even braille is more effective

Technically, it's two different thing but theoretically, the gains are the same? Maybe? XD

I think this is actually a rather interesting topic for discussion. There are many ways we can look at this, firstly you have the fact that listening to a book and reading one are 2 completely different things, but the overall outcome of the both are exactly the same. However you wouldn't want your kid to come back from school to tell you that he/she has read a whole book today, to find out that all he/she did was listen to the teacher read the words for them.

However when listening to an audio book, you don't have to focus as much, which frees up your mind to take in the story being read to you, but either way whether you're reading or listening, you're still consuming the information, and depending upon your preferred method of learning, would probably affect which way you'd prefer to consume the information. If you're linguistic then you probably prefer physically reading. If you're spatial then you more than likely prefer to watch the movie, and if you're auditory-musical then my guess would be an audio book is your preferred method.

So yes, I think audio books do count as reading, it would be unfair for the blind or partially blind not to be able to call themselves a reader, when the outcome for information is the same, just like the learning methods, different ways to learn based on each individual person, however the overall outcome in the same, so whatever is best for an individual person.

If the listened word slim to none differs from the typographic reading, how many mobile calls do I need to make before officially becoming a literate?

It differ's from calling or talking, in a way how the narrative goes, how it is one sided (therefore, requires more focusing) and the processing of information and story. Mostly narrative. Plus most of the books instills good values and ideas which builds up a character.

A storytelling task, beautifully done by page-letters duo and aaudddiiooboookkksss, but the latter one lacks some compulsory substance; it only makes us to think we've learnt something!

Comparing to all the stuff that's been made before the naturalization of mp3's with somebody buzzing stories in our ears such as mosquitoes, Audiobooks seem to be very "passive", assuming Sophie's explanation on how her friend tends to forget about what she's listened and the "you don't have to focus" bit that's been said with so much reason!

You don't have any control of the reading timing (assuming by popular demand that audiobook's listeners are "readers" whilst the narrator is, consequently the "typewriter" ha ahah ha h), if you don't understand a word that's been said there's a chance you will not know how to spell it on search bar (which doesn't make it the best tool of enhancing the vocabulary) and, if one's allowing themself to outsource the "to-convert letters to sound and ideas" function to someone else, how on Earth can we be sure our brain is actually absorbing from a 4GB Lord of the Rings audiobook FLAC? All of this is a half personal and mayb biological point but, anyways, the spoken voice still is quite lacking in texture and what we can call "activeness" to attempt mimicking all of the substance and control we've got once intrinsically glued to an awesome novel in paper, on which the itinerary is 100% ours, laughing of the prophecy which demonizes the analogical and makes us to think it's effective for our mentality to use such solitary and pleasing experience as something of multitask

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by LUCPIX

A storytelling task, beautifully done by page-letters duo and aaudddiiooboookkksss, but the latter one lacks some compulsory substance; it only makes us to think we've learnt something!

Comparing to all the stuff that's been made before the naturalization of mp3's with somebody buzzing stories in our ears such as mosquitoes, Audiobooks seem to be very "passive", assuming Sophie's explanation on how her friend tends to forget about what she's listened and the "you don't have to focus" bit that's been said with so much reason!

You don't have any control of the reading timing (assuming by popular demand that audiobook's listeners are "readers" whilst the narrator is, consequently the "typewriter" ha ahah ha h), if you don't understand a word that's been said there's a chance you will not know how to spell it on search bar (which doesn't make it the best tool of enhancing the vocabulary) and, if one's allowing themself to outsource the "to-convert letters to sound and ideas" function to someone else, how on Earth can we be sure our brain is actually absorbing from a 4GB Lord of the Rings audiobook FLAC? All of this is a half personal and mayb biological point but, anyways, the spoken voice still is quite lacking in texture and what we can call "activeness" to attempt mimicking all of the substance and control we've got once intrinsically glued to an awesome novel in paper, on which the itinerary is 100% ours, laughing of the prophecy which demonizes the analogical and makes us to think it's effective for our mentality to use such solitary and pleasing experience as something of multitask

---

I personally tend tend to listen to audiobooks on 1.5x or 1.75x which is around the same speed as I would probably read it so unless you read way faster than that as most the time 2x speed sounds like a chipmunk it’ll probably be at a similar speed of finishing a book.

I will say it really does depend on the narrator on whether I can listen to the audiobook. Some narrators are terrible and I couldn’t listen to their voice for the entire book. Stephen Fry however is an excellent narrator so I’ve listened to a few books just because he’s the narrator.

I disagree with some of the other comments in this thread about not having to concentrate nearly as much, I find at least in the beginning of the story as you’re learning the new characters and new landscapes you need a fair amount of concentration. So I wouldn’t start a new book if I was working on a challenging project at work otherwise I wouldn’t take anything in and would have to restart.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Sloths

I disagree with some of the other comments in this thread about not having to concentrate nearly as much, I find at least in the beginning of the story as you’re learning the new characters and new landscapes you need a fair amount of concentration. So I wouldn’t start a new book if I was working on a challenging project at work otherwise I wouldn’t take anything in and would have to restart.

---

Correct!!!!??!?! We can't leave the narrator more or less like it's an ambient music, and not pay due attention to what's being said -- am a believer that there is a negligence an ease on zoning out of the spoken word specially because, unlike physical books, it doesn't show itself like it also demands of your understanding and, most importantly, capacity of imagining! It still has to be an intimate connection, a conversation between reader and writer but, since the sense of hearing is naturally distracted, considering we're not ALL THE TIMES focused on all the sounds like in-peril animals, just like on TV, some automatically assume we're assimilating what's being said just because our ears can capture it, it you get it?? The cognitive exigence happens more strongly and quickly on printed word since one does it alone and because we already know that the letters won't be of any utility unless we let the thought take the lead

I really like audio books. I listen to them in the car as I have a long commute. I use them for books that I probably would never read (e.g. Don Quixote - I couldn't read books of that length if I tried lol)

I used to love audio books when I was younger and got carsick on long journeys but I find it harder now since I started listening to TV/music in the background more all noise just kinda fades out these days :(

I would say it doesn't count as "reading" but it does count as being part of a book experience or you've ingested the book if that makes sense??

I've never listen to an audiobook. I would like to try it one day I guess.

At the moment I am happy to pick up a book and read it :)