Hi friends,

You probably won't be surprised to hear that I was recently fed yet another "audiobooks are not real reading" video on TikTok. It seems to be happening every 3-5 business days at this point.

In this one, even as people tried to kindly explain how reading actually works to the original poster, she dug her heels in, insisting that she simply "disagreed" with things like facts and science because, according to her, "you didn't read 22 books in a month" if some of them were audiobooks.

The kicker? In the video, she asks ChatGPT to define reading, and that's what she was using as the foundation of her argument.

Far be it from me to kink-shame anyone's being-loud-and-wrong-on-the-internet kink, but after I finished wiping away my tears of mirth, I really started to wonder: why are the people who make these videos so deeply pressed about audiobooks?

Because, at this point, we have studies confirming that comprehension between listening and reading is comparable. We know storytelling has deep oral traditions. We know accessibility matters. So why does this debate refuse to die?

If you'll allow me to just give some best estimates based on my experience of book communities, here's what I think:

- Ableism and not simply because audiobooks can be used as an accessibility tool, but because I feel like there is an inherent ableism in the way people conflate effort with legitimacy as if reading only "counts" if it requires a certain kind of labor—one that aligns with a narrow, neurotypical, able-bodied experience. There's this idea that if something feels too easy, too passive, or too accessible to the person making the argument, it must not be real or valid. That logic inherently devalues the ways different people engage with books, whether due to disability, neurodivergence, or simply preference.

This is all to say that I think that people make this argument because of knee-jerk internalized ableism that suggests that the act of engaging with a story or absorbing information only matters with the requisite amount of acceptable work.

- Gatekeeping and Elitism. If there's one thing publishing is good at, it's gatekeeping, and too often, book communities inherit those tendencies. The "audiobooks aren't real reading" argument is the cousin of every complaint about someone's preferred genre, reading speed, or aesthetics. Literacy has a deep legacy of exclusion, as a privilege hoarded by the elite, and some people still get their special tingles from holding onto those ideas. The dismissal of audiobooks is just one more way to reinforce who is allowed to claim the identity of a "serious reader."

Some readers treat reading as a symbol of intellectual status. This elitism often leads to the idea that only certain kinds of books, certain genres, and certain reading formats are valid. If audiobooks count, their cultivated image as a "serious reader" feels less exclusive. It's not about books; it's about maintaining an arbitrary hierarchy where only their version of reading is considered legitimate.

- Jealousy. If there's an "audiobooks aren't reading" argument to be found, somewhere nearby, "you didn't read that many books" is lurking. When some people hear that someone read 22 books in a month, let's say, they feel bad about themselves, and they aren't self-aware enough to realize that any competitiveness they feel with other readers is insecurity.

Instead of reckoning with that insecurity, they project it outward, framing the issue as other people inflating their numbers rather than confronting why they feel inadequate in the first place. It's easier to dismiss an audiobook listener's reading habits than to ask themselves why someone else's book count is making them feel some type of way.

- Print Supremacy. Many of us, especially in US-based education systems, grew up with the idea that reading means physically holding a book. For some, print books represent the purest form of reading, and anything outside of that—whether it's audiobooks, ebooks, or even graphic novels—is seen as a dilution of what it means to engage with a text. But nostalgia isn't an argument.

I'd also argue that consumerism plays a part here. Publishing and book marketing has convinced us to place immense value on the physical form of books, perhaps in a way that shapes how people think about what counts as reading. If reading is deeply tied to the tangible object—if the act of turning pages, seeing the words, and placing a book on a shelf is part of what makes it feel legitimate—then a format that removes those elements will feel illegitimate to some.

The problem, then, isn't the audiobook itself; it's how we've been taught to value reading as something physical rather than something intellectual or experiential.

And, I mean, I love print books, and all the ones running me out of the house and home can attest to that. But preference is also not an argument, so you won't see me getting on God's green Internet to pretend that loving print books means reading doesn't happen in other forms.

- Resistance to Change. This isn't a new phenomenon. People resisted ebooks when they first gained popularity, claiming they didn't "feel" the same as physical books or that screens ruined the reading experience. People still argue about paperbacks versus hardbacks. I suppose the difference is that no one is setting up their tripod to say that paperbacks aren't real reading.

(Right? I better not get this video on my FYP next.)

- Media Illiteracy which is probably a nicer thing than I actually want to say. I started this post by saying that at this point, we know the studies, we know about oral tradition, and we understand accessibility, but the truth is, I'm not sure these people know. I'm not sure they understand much of how reading works, or how we consume stories, or what it means to process words and meaning.

And what's worse, they certainly don't want to know. Trying to use studies or explain brain function to someone who just doesn't feel like reading includes audiobooks is a losing battle. We can tell they have no interest in the way a brain functions.

Audiobook deniers are not looking for facts but for validation of their existing beliefs. For them, this argument is always about winning by cutting someone else down to size.

Reading is about engaging with words and ideas. Whether your eyes are scanning text, your fingers are following Braille, or your ears are absorbing a story, you are processing and interpreting language. That's reading. But I know you know that.

So, what do you think? Why do people get so weird about this? Did I miss any important points?

Happy reading, friends. I'm about to finish listening to The Unbroken by C.L. Clarke. The video I'm working on is catching up on a bunch of Bindery Wheel picks, so, thanks to audiobooks, you can expect that video sometime next week!

❤️

Mari

If you are reading this and haven't yet followed me, please do so! It's free and takes 15 seconds to sign up. If you'd like access to my Discord and bonus content, consider spending $5 a month to support my work and publishing journey. Either way, thanks for being here!