We Asked, You Answered: Is Listening to Audiobooks 'Reading'?

Posted by Marie on August 17, 2018


This post is sponsored by Audible.

In recent years, more and more bibliophiles are turning to audiobooks as a way to discover new stories (and re-discover old favorites). At Goodreads, we know that books can be experienced in many different ways—which is why audiobooks count toward your Reading Challenge. But as their popularity grows, there's still the occasional debate as to whether listening to audiobooks can be considered the same as "reading."

We turned to our followers on Facebook and Twitter for their opinions and received a wide array of responses on how audiobooks have expanded their horizons. Which ones resonate with you? Let us know in the comments!


1. "I do consider it reading. Reading isn’t just about looking at the words on the page or hearing words as they’re being read. It’s about processing, imagining, and understanding. Science has shown those processes are similar whether reading with your eyes, your ears, or your fingers," says Buddy.

2. "If you strictly base it on the technical definition of reading, they're certainly not the same. They're different language skills. But I think the whole point of both is the consumption of literature. That's why it doesn't matter if you read [a book] or listened to it," says Calvin.

3. "1000% counts as reading. You’re still absorbing the material, just in a different format. And let’s not forget that [they are] extremely helpful, if not completely necessary, for the visually impaired!" says Michal.

4. "I don’t consider it reading, although I understand why some people need audiobooks and prefer them. I think reading an actual book is just a totally different experience then listening to one," says Jessica.

5. "Audiobooks are great for those those looking to experience a book while walking or exercising, or those with vision problems. But that’s called listening. Reading is with your eyes. Not better. Just different," says Jeanne.

6. "Yes, I consider it reading. I’m still dedicating time to the story and following along. I’ve 're-read' a couple of books this way and actually picked up on new details I hadn’t before. It was exciting for me," says Belinda.

7. "I like to listen to audiobooks when I'm hiking or driving long distances. I used to think it was 'cheating,' but listening to a story is just an alternative form of enjoying a book," says Andrea.

8. "They don’t provide the exact same experience, but they both provide incredible stories. I think the coolest part is how audiobooks have modernized the human tradition of telling stories out loud with the spoken word," says Nick.

9. "By one definition, audiobooks aren't reading. But by the definition of reading as 'interpretation,' I think it fits," says Raygina.

10. "In the same way that Braille is still 'reading' even though it technically does not involve visual processing of written information, audiobooks involve construction of visual interpretations of the information conveyed through symbolic language. Essentially, reading." says Josh.



Do you consider listening to audiobooks the same as reading? Share your two cents in the comments!

For more inspiration, check out the Goodreads' audiobooks page, brought to you by Audible.

Check out more recent blogs:
12 Things Readers Really Want Nonreaders to Know
Back-to-School Reading for Adults: The Best New Nonfiction
Catch Up Now: These Big Series All Have Books Coming Out in September

Comments Showing 1-50 of 400 (400 new)


message 1: by Melissa (new)

Melissa I do wish there was a way to mark “paper book” or “aduiobook” on my book lists!


message 2: by Jazzy (last edited Aug 17, 2018 09:11AM) (new)

Jazzy Lemon Reading? no.
Consuming information? yes Listening? yes

Reading is something you have to make time for and you have to give your attention to the book. You can't read and drive, for instance. At least I hope no one is doing that, that's why texting and driving is against the law! When you read you have to put the book in front of you and either read with your eyes (or hands if you're reading braille). You can process the information by listening, but it's like listening to music, you don't read music by listening to it. You read it by looking over the notes and applying them. That's reading. Audiobooks nice and for people with reading difficulties they can let them know about books, but you can't read them, you listen to them, with someone else's voice instead of the ones in your imagination. You watch television, but you're not reading it. You listen to the radio, but you're not reading it.

It's nice to have someone read to you, but they're doing the reading, you're doing the listening, and that's what an audiobook is - someone else reading to you.


message 3: by Sherrelle (new)

Sherrelle Melissa wrote: "I do wish there was a way to mark “paper book” or “aduiobook” on my book lists!"
You can edit the edition of the book if that helps. I also created a separate shelf for the audiobooks I've listened to.


message 4: by Michael (new)

Michael I am weary of the book snobs who say that listening to audiobook isn't the same as reading it. Get over yourselves!


message 5: by Vikas (new)

Vikas I don't technically listen to audiobooks, as I am merely using TTS function in my Moon+ Pro reader but it has revolutionized my reading by enabling to read during my commute to and fro the office. I usually have couple of Physical books going at a time and then few e-books which I mostly listen to now and occasionally read mainly to read the last chapters or something. Although I did listen to Artemis on Audibles and it was nice I also have A wrinkle in Time in audible and it should be nice too.

Well it's reading because the primary motive is to enjoy the story. Listening is a little different but the enjoyment is the same. So yeah it's reading and it's awesome. I have finished more than 28 books in the last month and a half with this and I am glad for it and continue to benefit from it.


message 6: by Eric (new)

Eric Mesa Melissa wrote: "I do wish there was a way to mark “paper book” or “aduiobook” on my book lists!"

I just use a shelf for that


message 7: by Hazel (new)

Hazel Johnstone it’s the same in my, er, book.


message 8: by Zoe (new)

Zoe I love Audiobooks (although I am now increasingly addicted to podcasts) but do feel a bit guilty when they count towards my Reading Challenge. There are so many books and so little time to actually sit down and read half of the ones you are interested in. Audiobooks are a great way to combine a love of books with a busy life.


message 9: by Kuckoo (new)

Kuckoo Its listening for both visually impaired as well as for those who can see. For visually impaired reading is through the touch of their hands on braille letters and i dont think they get same feel while listening to an audio book.
Reading and listening are two different kind where the former cannot be used for multitasking purpose whereas the latter can be.
Reading is like mothers love which is irreplacable


message 10: by Leslie (new)

Leslie If reading is seen as consuming knowledge, then yes I think audio books are considered a form or reading. As for the literal sense, it probably doesn't count. But there are people who believe reading an ebook doesn't count as reading when I believe it does.


message 11: by Mary (new)

Mary I don’t really believe it is reading. There are so many details that you can miss when you are LISTENING to something as compared to when you are actually reading each word.

For some books I guess it’s ok and it kind of depends on the person listening/reading it too, but I, for myself, wouldn’t count listening to a book the same as reading it.


message 12: by Jeff (last edited Aug 17, 2018 09:31AM) (new)

Jeff I'm only interested in actual information, not the method by which it is conveyed. Books are written to convey information. Audiobooks are recorded to convey information. Braille books are printed to convey information. Videos are recorded to convey information. Anyone arguing a difference is arguing semantics or doesn't understand the purpose of books or reading. Chances are good that the information I absorb from audiobooks during my commute is comparable, if not equal to books I read in my spare time (and I do both). The difference is that I'm able to get the same information, memorize it, analyze it, criticize it, and think about it in half the amount of time it takes to read a paper or electronic copy. It allows me to move on to more information in other books. As a historophile, this lets me get in as many books on a topic I'm currently interested in as possible. I love it, and it gives a more rounded education with different authors and points of view, along with information omitted by another author, on the same topic. Anyone thirsty for information knows it doesn't matter how you get it.


message 13: by Beverly (new)

Beverly Melissa wrote: "I do wish there was a way to mark “paper book” or “audiobook” on my book lists!"

I've added a shelf called listened-to that I click when I have finished the book.


message 14: by Dianne (new)

Dianne Technically listening to a book is NOT reading a book -so no I'm NOT going to "get over myself" nor am I a book snob. I suggest that those who are "weary" of us who take things literally take a nice long nap so they can perk up and join those who aren't so snotty!

"read·ing
ˈrēdiNG/Submit
noun
1.
the action or skill of reading written or printed matter silently or aloud.
"suggestions for further reading"
synonyms: perusal, study, scan, scanning; browse (through), look (through), glance (through), leaf (through), skim (through)
"a cursory reading of the financial pages" "


message 15: by Sonja (new)

Sonja Lindsey If listening to books is not considered reading then we cannot say that our kids are "reading" books when we read to them. We are encouraged to read to our children and many libraries and preschools have "reading challenges" for pre-readers where they count books read to children. While learning to read requires printed or written words, "reading" in the capacity we are talking about is the absorption and understanding of a story or information. My brain is processing the same story as someone who is visually reading the words with the exact same words that the person is visually reading, and I am still "in" the same story whether I am visually looking at the words or auditorily hearing them. For those reasons I think audio books are, and should be, considered "reading".


message 16: by Ashish (new)

Ashish Falswal I differ...
Points against Considering reading and listening as same thing.
1 Engagement:
Sure they are both the same when we maintain same pace throughout, without intermittent pauses. How often does it happen, surely not with me I take my time every now and then to grasp the content deeply and at times skipping and skimming.
2 Reading Between the lines:
Ofcourse the phrase is meant for reading not listening. How could we hear between the lines without loosing continuity. Especially true in case of philosophical underpinnings.
3 Distraction:
Exactly ! Possible both way around.
4 Learning and remembering:
If English is not your mother-tongue there is so much to learn from reading. And I do consider its easier to remember something you said, something you have written, something you read and lastly something you heard in decreasing order.
Anyway listening is not something feasible for every book we have, and certainly not enjoyable for many.

But its not like audiobooks are a new phenomena, for centuries the bed time stories have been recited to us by our dear ones and there is a certain charm and easiness to it that cant be replicated in reading yourself.


message 17: by Lael (new)

Lael Melissa wrote: "I do wish there was a way to mark “paper book” or “aduiobook” on my book lists!"

I 100% agree with Melissa's feature suggestion!


message 18: by Julia (new)

Julia Mary wrote: "I don’t really believe it is reading. There are so many details that you can miss when you are LISTENING to something as compared to when you are actually reading each word.


Nope, I get a lot more detail absorbed by listening. With reading I do a lot of skimming through sentences and paragraphs whereas with audiobooks I am forced to listen to each word (this is a good thing). And you can pause it if you need to do something distracting.

I don't see why people would feel guilty about putting it toward your reading challenge - you listen to the book, you know what it's about, you completed it.

Audiobooks are the best for driving, in my opinion. You never get mad at being stuck in traffic.

That being said, I do think there is something being lost in people who ONLY listen to audiobooks. I have a friend who can't even sit down with a book anymore because he only listens, which is a shame.


message 19: by Bookfan (new)

Bookfan It is not reading, it is listening. You don't have to do anything. It is passive, not active. Like TV.


message 20: by Kat (new)

Kat I would respectfully suggest that all the people replying that "audiobooks aren't really reading" or "listening isn't really reading" are blissfully unaware of the challenges many people in the real world face, and have never had to deal with any of the following issues:

-Visual impairment
-Loss of coordination or motor function in the fingers, hands or arms that prevents one from physically turning the pages of a book
-Dyslexia or other learning disability

To suggest audiobooks somehow "don't count" is an Ableist statement. As it details clearly in the article below: able-bodied neurotypical wealthy people have more time and opportunity to read physical books.

Some reading for you on the subject:
https://bookriot.com/2017/10/24/audio...


message 21: by Derpa (last edited Aug 17, 2018 09:55AM) (new)

Derpa Honestly, I am really tired of some people almost snobbishly trying to discount things when it comes to this. So audiobooks don't count, ebooks don't count, blabbity blah blah doesn't count.
Here is the thing. Experiencing a story should be the focal point of this whole hobby, but I keep seeing people trying to make it a much more exclusive club than it should be. This is not a contest.

For people who constantly try to talk about some sort of intellectual, inner world we can be particularly superficial and materialistic when it comes to who is in the club and who is not in it.

Also, specifically with audiobooks... saying a blind person never freaking ever read a book would sound a bit asshole-ish to me. Probably to a lot of us. But somehow we have to prove we are MORE as literature fans than the person who may not be blind, but has attention issues. Or works a lot where you can still listen to stuff. Or has to travel a lot every day. Or gets headaches easily. Or suffers from some other illness I probably can't even name that gives them issues we wouldn't even think of.
Or just prefers to listen, which is their prerogative.

It almost feels like people are getting ridiculously protective of reading. Imagine, back in the day most people had no access to it and I'm pretty sure some were against the popularisation of printing and teaching reading to basically everyone, because that would taint the sacred nature of this thing.
And this reminds me of that, really.

Here is something I have been thinking of more recently; we should try talking more about the stories and less about how much money we spent on books, how many we have, how many pages we're through, etc. Because THAT should be the point of it, not comparing our literary penises to each other.


message 22: by Sarah (new)

Sarah Melissa wrote: "I do wish there was a way to mark “paper book” or “aduiobook” on my book lists!"

Most books have different formats and you can choose the format and rate that version.


message 23: by Lu (new)

Lu I wish i could exclude from my reading challenge count the audiobooks. I tend to do audiobooks for light stuff during commute or exercise. I never do audiobook for something more serious or a classic. I like to be able to go back.


message 24: by Susanne (new)

Susanne Davison Melissa wrote: "I do wish there was a way to mark “paper book” or “aduiobook” on my book lists!"


message 25: by Susanne (new)

Susanne Davison There is...create a shelf for it in your account.


message 26: by Olivia (new)

Olivia Sunshine If I listen to an audiobook I will put it down as read so I guess yes


message 27: by Tesalonica (new)

Tesalonica Jazzy wrote: "Reading? no.
Consuming information? yes Listening? yes

Reading is something you have to make time for and you have to give your attention to the book. You can't read and drive, for instance. At l..."

Of course both are literature, but so completely different mental processes. I lost a lot when I listened to audiobooks. Pronunciation was an issue for me. And then, if I listened while doing something else, the distractions. When I went out for a walk, the traffic was the main distraction, having to cross the street and not get run over by a car, or the traffic noise. I had to adjust the volume of my earphones all the time to be able to hear the narrator and that's not healthy, so I stopped for those reasons.


message 28: by Melissa (new)

Melissa Sherrelle wrote: "Melissa wrote: "I do wish there was a way to mark “paper book” or “aduiobook” on my book lists!"
You can edit the edition of the book if that helps. I also created a separate shelf for the audioboo..."


same :)


message 29: by Amanda (new)

Amanda Taylor I appreciate those who have mentioned how reading braille is still reading. I teach students who are visually impaired and help some of them learn braille. There have been a lot of arguments over the last 6 years I've been teaching about whether they are reading. And I honestly believe they are. Sometimes my students like to read audiobooks as well, to give their fingers a rest. Reading through audio definitely uses a different part of your brain, but it is still reading because it engages your brain.


message 30: by Janice (new)

Janice Not to me, nor is "reading" 'Chiffnotes'.


message 31: by Eeva (new)

Eeva katwiththehat wrote: "I would respectfully suggest that all the people replying that "audiobooks aren't really reading" or "listening isn't really reading" are blissfully unaware of the challenges many people in the rea..." Amen.


message 32: by Vikas (new)

Vikas Derpa wrote: "Honestly, I am really tired of some people almost snobbishly trying to discount things when it comes to this. So audiobooks don't count, ebooks don't count, blabbity blah blah doesn't count.
Here ..."


@Derpa I agree completely and I believe that it's kind of snnobish behaviour kinda like those movie people who don't consider Netflix movies movies just because they are not released in a traditional sense i.e. in a theator.

My view is simple my time is limited the books I want to enjoy are limitless so whatever way I am going to be able to enjoy as many as I can I will do. I enjoy all Physical Books, E-Books and now E-books with TTS and few audio books too.


message 33: by Krishnanunni (new)

Krishnanunni The answer,Depends on why you read a book.
If you want to immerse yourself in a book to understand the ideas in the book and meld them into your own thought process to make yourself a sharper individual with more empathy and a nuanced perspective, I'd say both are the same.But if you are some sort of book junkie who believes that books should be smelled read scribbled and stained- a sort of canine territoriality,I'd say :P

I love all three - eBooks, audio books and physical books,and have a mixed library of all three!!
eBooks- are convenient, for the ability to annotate and export, and screenshot-I have the habit of summarizing everything I read into my One Note-notebook.
Paper books have an aesthetic appeal that is unparalleled.I would say one would need to read the paper book to truly appreciate the book as a whole- the fonts the scents the choice of paper. I am choosy when it comes to buying paper books.

And audio books- Oh Golly , I remember listening to my first audio book. An audio book read by the author renders the book an intimacy which delights me!
I felt so powerful when I was able to 'read' through half of a book during my daily commute.Not to mention having a decent comprehension means you can listen to the books at higher speeds.That being said, any person who knows how to read well will be able to comprehend faster by reading than listening.


message 34: by Tobias (last edited Aug 17, 2018 10:23AM) (new)

Tobias I enjoyed audiobooks more as a child, getting them on loan from the local library in my home town, on cassette no less. I remember not being allowed to renew my loan of The Worst Witch series and being quite miffed about it.

However, with the dawn of newer technologies, it's not something I've done as an adult, in fact I've nearly finished my first ever audiobook - Bonkers, by Jennifer Saunders, and have largely enjoyed it due to her narration. Having said that, I'm not sure if it's a brilliant book, but it has been a brilliant listen. On the other hand, I have found myself actively reading the book as well as being read to as there'll be the occasional word or name that I'll want to investigate further.

The narrator can also make a massive difference if listening to a book, as we each have our own voice in our head when we read. As a Brit, I prefer to have books read by someone I'm familiar with - Stephen Fry's versions of Harry Potter are a popular example, and Joanna Lumley is the aural equivalent of silk.

Ultimately, I think it really depends on the book you're reading or listening to, as well as the narrator, who can make or break the experience.

Is listening 'reading'? I'm on the fence for this, I'm afraid.


message 35: by Ina (new)

Ina I understand people who say that audiobooks count as reading, but I have to disagree. Technically, it's not reading. If it is, then does listening to podcasts also count as reading? Does listening to movie with your eyes closed also count as reading? (For example Fantastic Beasts and Where to Find Them book is the script of the movie of the same name. Therefore, is listening to the movie basically reading?)

I hope I didn't offend anyone as it wasn't my intention. This is just my opinion and I would love to hear your answers to my questions.

But please understand that I'm not offending anyone who listens to audiobooks. If you like them, that's great and I hope you keep doing that.


message 36: by Olivia (new)

Olivia I count it as reading, though I do feel they are different experiences. I wish for the reading challenge round up at the end of the year, it would tell you how many of the books you counted for your challenge were audiobooks versus physical or ebooks. For example, You read 50 books in 2018, 10 of which were audiobooks!

So they still count, but they're at least distinguished as being different.


message 37: by Ashish (last edited Aug 17, 2018 10:30AM) (new)

Ashish Falswal Ashish wrote: "I differ...
Points against Considering reading and listening as same thing.
1 Engagement:
Sure they are both the same when we maintain same pace throughout, without intermittent pauses. How often..."


Wow! Just because I differ, i had tickled someones empathy and concern for differently-abled. Its like someone being ridiculed as rude, snob, blissfully unaware for running in front of disabled person.
Seriously, are we even having such an arguably absurd conversation.

We were saying that running on a treadmill and in park are two different things. Its not that it won't count or its not exercise. Its just a bit (emphasis) different. Treadmill runner should not be offended from free runner. In the end both are good for body and mind, cant say about soul for former.


message 38: by Nevada (new)

Nevada To me, reading a book has a lot to do with imagination, impression, interpretation, and pacing. Something as minor as the tone that a phrase is read in on the audiobook can totally change the way that the reader internalizes that information.

I like having all the power to interpret and decide for myself; I don't like having someone else's opinions (conveyed by tone, inflection, and pacing) foisted on me and my reading experience. Listening to books definitely counts in the whole "Have you read that book?" scenario, but I really think something is taken away from the experience when you just listen to a book. I've lost track of how many books I don't like and haven't read just because I had an issue with the reader.


message 39: by Samyann (new)

Samyann Of course it’s reading. It’s just a different form. Get where you’re going in a wheelchair or by walking - enjoy Harry Potter by listening or reading.

BTW, there are some book enhanced beyond your wildest imagination when read allowed by a good narrator. For example, if you haven’t listened to the In Death series, you haven’t truly enjoyed the books. The characters come alive.


message 40: by Nadia (new)

Nadia I agree with Buddy on #1 & Andrea on #7. Audiobooks are incredibly useful to me when I'm knitting, on driving trips, walking the dog, doing exercise and cleaning my home. Reading a book will ALWAYS be my go-to; however, I'm elated to have the option of enjoying great books while engaged in other activities!!


message 41: by Dianne (last edited Aug 17, 2018 10:47AM) (new)

Dianne I really have no horse in this race. You choose to 'read' the way you will -it is none of my business. However, I don't like being told that I'm a snob just because I used the literal sense of the word "reading" to interpret this question and choose to not think of this format as reading a book. If anything that just goes to prove that the bias runs two ways.

Now I have two questions for the audiobook listeners, yes you are listening not reading! Literally! (just teasing BTW)!

1 - When you are listening to a book while driving or doing chores or whatnot, how do you really concentrate on what is going on with the book?

2-If you listen to a book how do you not allow the interpretation of the reader to color your enjoyment of the book? I know when I read I 'hear' the book - the inflections, accent, the tone, what I 'hear' in my mind color how I enjoy the book. Is it easy to hand over the reins (so to speak) to someone else?


Nikki "The Crazie Betty" V. I think it depends on the person. I think it could be compared to how everyone learns in different ways. Some people retain information easier by hearing, while others need visual stimulation and even others need to write down the material to retain the information. I think 'reading' is the same thing. If you get more from an audio book than from reading a physical book, then go for it. Personally, I find that whenever I try to listed to an audio book I inevatible miss half the story and have to keep going to back to re-listen. That is not an enjoyable experience for me so I will continue to use my eyes instead of my ears. My husband, on the other hand, has the same issue with reading. He'll read multiple chapters before he realizes he hasn't been paying attention and has to go back and re-read them all. When he listens it works better for his brain so he retains more of the information.

I think trying to discount audio books as reading is like saying that everyone should have to learn something in the same way, which is never going to happen. What works for some isn't going to work for others, we are all wired differently. Enjoying lit, in any format, should be for enjoyment. To try and take that away from someone by saying that their preferred format doesn't count is incredibly selfish. We should be pushing everyone to enjoy literature in whatever way they are able.


message 43: by Sean (new)

Sean Melissa wrote: "I do wish there was a way to mark “paper book” or “aduiobook” on my book lists!"

create an audio book shelf


message 44: by Cynthia (new)

Cynthia As I peruse the multiple definitions of "reading" I would have to say that listening to audio books is reading, its just a different form of reading, just like braille is a different form of writing. The user interprets the data being presented and comprehends it. Definitions of reading include "the action or skill of reading written or printed matter silently or aloud." and "an interpretation." In the beginning I felt guilty for using an audio book on my reading challenge, but I have come to understand that I am being read to from an actual book. I am just a member of the audience that is being read to, participating in the interpretation of the story, comprehending story lines. Sometimes I envision a mini movie in my head and sometimes I envision the words on the page. It's all open to interpretation. I understand that in order to read one must recognize words, and comprehend them in context. Since I am able to do that, as well as others in this group, I consider listening to a book the same as reading the book, because I am able to recognize and comprehend the words being read to me. As I have looked at the other comments, I have to say it's been a good debate.


message 45: by Sean (new)

Sean Samyann wrote: "Of course it’s reading. It’s just a different form. Get where you’re going in a wheelchair or by walking - enjoy Harry Potter by listening or reading.

BTW, there are some book enhanced beyond you..."


Is going somewhere in a wheelchair walking? You get to the same place, so the effect is the same, but you didn't walk there.

If you listen to a TV show, but don't look at it, you didn't watch it.

Read and listen are two different things. This isn't to say that listening to an audio book is anything less than reading the book, just that listening is not reading.


message 46: by Bookfan (new)

Bookfan Sonja wrote: "If listening to books is not considered reading then we cannot say that our kids are "reading" books when we read to them. We are encouraged to read to our children and many libraries and preschool..."

That is correct. Otherwise you would say that an infant can read.


message 47: by Kat (new)

Kat Tesalonica wrote: "I lost a lot when I listened to audiobooks. Pronunciation was an issue for me. And then, if I listened while doing something else, the distractions. When I went out for a walk, the traffic was the main distraction..."

Then clearly YOUR brain does not read as well through that medium. However, some people may pick up more information that way, find it easier to process the details of the book if they're not also having to fight through their dyslexia to decode every word and sentence, to retain the narrative if they don't have to go days between picking the book up because they physically can't pick the book up after their fingers/arms stopped working right because of MD, ALS, stroke, or a host of other medical conditions, and to enjoy reading if every single word doesn't hurt because of constant pain every time they use their eyes (shingles, severe migraine, photophobia brought on by many diseases.)

And frankly, to the GR Blogger who wrote this post, I find the idea you'd bring this up as a blog question without even a paragraph or two from the perspective of those who cannot read physical books and rely on audiobooks as their sole means to access literature really Ableist and disrespectful to people with disabilities. What's up for next week, highlighting a list of books by (pick your favorite marginalized group) and asking if those should "count" as much as other books?


message 48: by Bookfan (new)

Bookfan Amanda wrote: "I appreciate those who have mentioned how reading braille is still reading. I teach students who are visually impaired and help some of them learn braille. There have been a lot of arguments over t..."

Braille is just another language. Reading Braille is certainly reading. Dots vs. squiggles.


message 49: by Scott (new)

Scott Thrift I use audiobooks frequently and love them, but I worry about elementary schools encouraging young consumers to use audiobooks rather than practicing reading skills.


message 50: by Kat (new)

Kat Ashish wrote: "Wow! Just because I differ....

Seriously, are we even having such an arguably absurd conversation.

We were saying that running on a treadmill and in park are two different things. Its not that it won't count or its not exercise. Its just a bit (emphasis) different. Treadmill runner should not be offended from free runner. In the end both are good for body and mind, cant say about soul for former. "


Here are the parts you're blissfully unaware about:

You have the choice to run on that treadmill or the park. The person who cannot read a physical book because of disability does not have that choice. So you making blithe comments like "can't say about the soul" and saying that the only option that disabled person still has to be able to read isn't really reading is really snotty and Ableist. If you can't understand that, I'm not sure what to tell you.

And it's not an "absurd" conversation when people are making Ableist comments like "you wouldn't call travelling in a wheelchair walking" and the only way some people are able to read at all because of their disability is being brought up as a conversational topic as perhaps not really reading.


« previous 1 3 4 5 6 7 8
back to top