Stop the Audiobook Hate – the orang-utan librarian

I REALLY disliked this take. Everything about it stinks of snobbery- and I just can’t stand it. Because I have seen this argument *far too often* at this point and I’m not having it. So be prepared for an incoming RANT.
Because where does this person get off? Even before I listened to audiobooks, I considered it reading. Simply put, audiobooks are no different to books in terms of the language, ideas and story- the only difference is how we consume the words. It does not matter if the words are visual or auditory- they are the same!!
Now, according to this individual, the reason they shouldn’t count as reading is that audiobooks are apparently far easier to read. To which I’d respond, A) why’d you care? Reading doesn’t have to be a chore and B) who says so? A quick google search will tell you that in the general population 65% of learners are visual and only 30% are auditory. I can attest to my own experience that I struggled to get into audiobooks for a long time because I found it required more concentration, not less. Of course, this matters only in so much as you care about other people’s reading stats (which I’ve previously established is a weird thing to do).
In fairness to this poster, there is the caveat that this doesn’t apply to people with vision problems (and presumably they will make allowances for others with differing needs). Not only does this come across as patronising, like we all need this person’s permission to engage in our hobbies as we choose, but it doesn’t actually change this individual’s perspective. Listening to audiobooks either counts as reading or it doesn’t (spoiler alert, it does). It’s still “not reading” according to them- yet the author of the post feels slightly bad about holding this standard when it comes to people with disabilities (basically because they realise it’s wrong).
In truth, I find this take especially bizarre since oral storytelling is the oldest form of literature. From fairy tales to the Iliad, it’s where the tradition of stories began. There is an almost forgotten artistry in sharing our world in this way- a textured ability to build up a narrative and communicate more than we can simply see.
Hearing stories also happens to be how most of us begin to engage with literature. We hear stories before we have the ability to read in visual form. We form some of our greatest reading memories from this. That connection to the childhood pleasure of storytelling is part of why I love audiobooks so much- and why I will defend them and recommend them to everyone.
Arguing audiobooks shouldn’t be considered reading reeks of a desire to put other readers down and is flat out wrong. You don’t have to like audiobooks. And you don’t have to engage with them. But you ought to respect them as books. You cannot decide otherwise just because you have a misguided desire to feel superior. Snobbery has no place here.
Alright- what do you think? Are you a fan of audiobooks? Do you think they count as reading? Let me know in the comments!
Post navigation
53 thoughts on “Stop the Audiobook Hate”
I love AITA too and that’s a very pretentious take by the person. People like reading in different ways and have their own preferences. Just because you don’t do something doesn’t necessarily make it bad or wrong.
I’m personally not a fan of audiobooks, because as you said, it requires more concentration for some people (aka me). I lose track of the plot and prefer having something visual in front of me that I can potentially go back to. I sometimes listen to audioplays regardless (like The Sandman or Daisy Jones and the Six) and find those a bit easier. But all of that is just personal preference. Audiobooks count as reading either way and I’m equally as tired of people claiming it’s easier or not as valid. You’ve consumed a story, that’s it!
I totally understand that and really relate (I used to find it too hard to concentrate on them). But yes, some books work so so well in audio form (like daisy Jones and sandman) and books like that opened my eyes (or rather ears 😉) absolutely!!
There are also people out there who will say that they prefer physical books to ebooks, or who don’t believe that reading a graphic novel ‘counts’. I really cannot see why any of these things matter. There are so many ways to enjoy a story, should we not embrace all of them?
Definitely agree that audiobooks are a form of reading (not to mention for those with visual impairment) I have family members who are dyslexic and use audiobooks to read. And I’ve listened to audiobooks during long drives to entertain me. My friend listens to audio books to and from work, and while cleaning the house and doing her ironing to make the best use of her time. I also have elderly in-laws who listen to audiobooks because arthiritis makes it painful to hold a physical book for long periods of time.
Discounting audiobooks as reading is just showing someones ignorance to other peoples situations. We already have issues with bookbanning, we don’t need someone gatekeeping audiobooks as well.
On a side note: I can read a book faster than I can consume an audiobook, so it takes time and dedication to
Yeah, when I read that AITA post I was just like…”why do you care at all?” Like it doesn’t affect another person how someone consumes a media? Why is this even a topic that comes up so often?! Let people live, man. And yes, it is so weird to obsess about other people’s reading stats! We always say to not compare the number of books you read to another’s, so let’s not judge another person’s reading stats either. I don’t get it!
Also, I hadn’t even thought about how we all start off just listening to stories. It’s the original way we consume books. That is an excellent point!
The funny thing is that I don’t see anyone saying graphic novels or comics don’t count as reading. Like audiobooks they are a different way of consuming a story. There are graphic novels that don’t have any words in them. Do those count as reading? That an absolute yes.
As someone who been having vision problems for about a year now, gee I didn’t know I needed solely one person permission to count audiobooks as reading. *sarcasm*.
100% agree with this post. I seen so many other bloggers talk about this and add an -ist suffix at the end of able as a reason for people not liking audiobooks. Like that makes them smart and rational. It does not.
Sadly I have seen that I just don’t understand why, but people like to gatekeep other people’s reading.
I really relate- one of the main reasons I’ve shifted my own habits is to do with my own vision problems. I simply would not be able to read as much if I was relying on physical or ebooks… And do not need this person’s permission to rest my eyes 😅
I continue to be baffled by this whole thing, as well. If people want to be technical and use the term “listening” instead of “reading,” whatever, I guess. I can be pedantic, too, so I can excuse that in others! But when they get into the “it’s not real reading,” thing, I agree it makes no sense and just seems weirdly like they want to declare themselves “better at reading books” than other people. We’re not in second grade and no one is assessing our reading level and there are no prizes, so why?
When I ask someone if they’ve read a book, I am generally trying to have a conversation with them about that book. I want to talk about things like whether they liked the main character or what they thought about the prose or the themes or what they think will happen next. And it is possible to have that conversation whether they “listened to the audiobook” or “read the physical book,” so why would I care which one they did???
Yes same. Haha I hear you- I can be pedantic too, which is what I initially thought they’d say, but then they start saying it shouldn’t be counted in people’s stats, and just…. Why would you care about that? And why do you need to feel superior about how you read? Haha yes!!
Yes absolutely!! A lot of the time it’s completely irrelevant (it only becomes relevant when you’re recommending a particular format)
As someone who both loves audiobooks and also needs audiobooks due to disabilities (I have chronic migraines and chronic fatigue, both of which make reading physical formats really painful), I 100% agree and I too am so beyond done with the constant discourse. Beyond it being ableist, I also find it weird since, like you, I always point out that stories were first consumed in the oral tradition. There is also a tinge of a Western-centric worldview with the obsession with written stories too, as many Indigenous American and African societies solely used oral tradition until colonization, which mean many BIPOC mythology and folklore is instantly dismissed from being part of “The Canon.” Further, scientists have found time and time again that your brain processes a story the same whether you’re listening to it or reading it with your eyes! So it genuinely does just come down to personal opinion! Great post 🙂
I don’t get it either. I don’t read audio books as I don’t think that they would hold my attention as well and also, they take much longer than when I read to myself. However, the story and words are the same which ever method you use to read them.
As a novice writer, I see “read as much as you can” a lot as a piece of writing advice. It’s not incorrect, but (beyond just acquiring a command of writing a language) what it actually means is “consume as many [works of your chosen type] as you can.”
Reading books (again, talking about prose here) is not limited to the act of identifying ink symbols on a sheet of pressed paper. It’s the act of consuming and processing information, and in the case of fiction, stories, in a prosaic/narrative form.
Whether the story gets told to you or you read it yourself is completely secondary. There are people who are neither visual nor auditive learners, but who learn much better from stories regardless of format. If reading was the same as just visual recognition, then you wouldn’t have that kind of distinction.
Wow, I can’t believe people are still making an issue of this! I feel that there have been snobs saying audiobooks don’t count for years… and why do they care? As you say, there’s a weird fixation on what other people read. Who cares if my total for the year is higher than someone else’s? Who cares if my numbers include audiobooks? It’s just a weird thing to even bother about, in my opinion. Enjoying a book is enjoying a book, period… and if the person making the complaint makes an exception for people who are physically unable to read printed material, then they’re negating their entire point right there. Audiobooks are books! (So yes, my response to the AITA question is — definitely yes!)
Sorry. I don’t like audio books and I don’t count it as reading. Whenever I’m in book club with people who listened, 90% of the time they missed important things, like no recollection of certain scenes or plot points. They had no self picture of what a hat after looked like. Admittedly they got a vivid sense of place for description.
THANK YOU!!! I drive 30 miles each way for work and would not be able to read at all without audio books. This person’s perspective s fairly narrow and shows a certain level of privilege they are not accounting for.
I dunno. I don’t think it’s necessarily a slam to say that something is not reading. They are two different learning channels, both using language, but reading by definition is visual. It’s like, I dunno, you went on a spinach or a kale diet. Both are accomplishments, but spinach ain’t kale.
For me, it is actually much harder to focus on spoken words than on printed words. My mind is always wandering during the sermon, for example. For my husband, it’s the opposite. He cannot not listen when someone is speaking or when music is playing. He hears every word. I’m waiting for the audio versions of my books to come out so that he can finally … enjoy … them.
Hehe I can understand a bit of pedantry, however once someone is worrying about other people’s stats and saying effectively that it doesn’t count as consuming the book, then there’s an issue. To use your kale/spinach analogy, your stomach will be just as full from either one 😉
I can understand that. I also have more visual tendencies (but, mostly for vision reasons, have shifted my habits).
Yeah definitely. I wouldn’t argue the person hasn’t absorbed the content. For example, I hadn’t read Hegel or Gramschi or Foucault, but now I have listened to podcasts that excerpt from, analyze, and summarize them extensively. I still don’t say “I’ve read …” just because I’m pedantic I guess haha! And even if I had personally read them with my eyeballs, it would have been in translation anyway, so if someone wanted to be a snob they could ding me on that.
WHAT? Who says audiobooks isn’t reading, send them to me and I’ll set them straight 😉 No seriously though, I get you points and agree completely. No matter how you consume the book you are getting the story experience, for damn sure it counts as reading! 😀
I’m not a fan of audiobooks as they aren’t for me. I get distracted too easily and having a kid at home I actually need to keep my ears open! But I don’t have anything against them and they sure count as reading. Books are books no matter the format.
Socrates/Plato would probably have something to say to that anti-audiobook guy, given how they seem to prefer the oral tradition over the new written upstart. But seriously, what is with all these book gatekeeping folks? I saw one recently who was trying to argue that all books should have a minimum word count and I was like… huh??
I adore audiobooks! I have lengthy commute, that is bearable because of the audiobooks I listen to. To say audiobooks is not reading is ableist and rude. My daughter struggled with reading, but enjoyed audiobooks as it let her share in the love of stories in books that her friends were reading.
Personally, I don’t prefer audio books but that is only because I like the act of reading itself and holding a book in my hand. But I do think this is just a personal preference and I do feel that audio books are a legitimate form of reading for those who enjoy them. They do serve the same purpose as reading a book and so we can’t say they are less valuable.
I feel like people can get very pedantic over language (read vs listen), but strangely enough only with this issue! And when you bring up Braille as in do they say people ‘feel’ those books, they go very quiet because no one said that someone felt their book and expect to be understood. Nor do they say that someone using Braille to read books isn’t ‘really reading’. But like you mention, they wouldn’t say to someone with vision problems (or, I’m assuming, someone with dyslexia) that they’re not actually reading books when using audiobooks, so why is it okay to say to other people who are using audiobooks for other reasons? (Yes, I’ve recently had this discussion and it annoys me still).
I really don’t understand where people pulled this narrative of audiobooks not not being real reading, you are getting the exact same story as would using a physical book so their point makes no sense. And I can’t help but laugh when people say it’s easier than actually reading the book. The whole reason I cant get into audiobooks is because I find them much harder and can’t focus on them long enough to actually get what is happening in the story unless it’s a book that I know really well.
Maybe because I grew up with books and audiobooks weren’t really something I thought about much. I still don’t.
It’s something else but I sometimes try it with podcasts and only once in the last few years where I tried reading + listening at the same time. It’s helpful for listening to various types of dialects at some sort. Maybe, I’ll do that more often, it was fun so far.
To your question: I don’t really dislike or like audiobooks. Just never really thought – or think – of them.