Audiobooks were a mistake

I was searching for opinions on audiobooks and some of the potential disadvantages of listening compared to reading, and what I found was shocking. There's a whole audiobook culture... these people put on an audiobook at 1.5x speed while cooking, posting on Twitter and finishing off that presentation for work, and then have the audacity to see any criticism of this as "pretentious snobbery".

1. The myth of multitasking. People today are "soooo busy" (and proud of it) that they can't possibly sit down for a couple of hours and read, so they multitask. What they don't realise is that if you're doing three things at once, you are only devoting a third of your attention to each task. Multitasking ensures that you remain mediocre at everything.

2. Reading is an active exercise; listening is passive, no matter how hard you try. This is why reading comprehension and information retention is lower when listening. When you listen to an audiobook, you miss out on a ton of things on a reader would pick up on via visual engagement.

3. Most books aren't supposed to be read. There are literally audiobooks on econometrics, neuroscience and other technical subject. I don't know what's worse, that, or the fact that somebody is listening to some dense philosophical text and thinking he has any understanding of the topics at hand.

4. Having ADD (shit attention span) isn't an excuse to avoid reading. If you can't read more than one sentence without pulling out your phone and checking your Instagram feed, what makes you think you have the ability to listen to someone? Surely that requires an even greater focus. How about trying to overcome your problems?

There will come a time when so few actually read books, that books will be written specifically with audiobooks in mind, further diluting the quality of the last medium in which anything of value is still published.

...

As an analogy, listening to a book is the equivalent of watching a film on your phone.

just let the brainlets be brainlets. Audiobooks will never become more popular than the act of reading (whatever shape that takes in the future).

I have a 6 incher 'phablet' and watching a film on that is perfectly viable though, fuck yourself

imaging going through life being this unbearably pretentious. how horrifying.

The OP pre-emptively stated that any criticism of audiobooks is dismissed as pretentious, and you've just proved the point. You literally can't formulate an argument in defence of listening to books. Imagine going through life being this much of a brainlet.

reading a book yourself is the equivalent of having no slave or wife doing it for you

only spergy neoplatonists care about "pure reading"
and as always they are wrong about everything

You ever think about just how many people nowadays get the majority of their information from YouTube videos? Or, if you're slightly more upscale, podcasts and audiobooks? Think like Anthony Fantano, or Paul Joseph Watson, or any podcast where washed up celebs or e-celebs drone about current events. People use these as substitutes for reading actual news or articles.

Granted, previous generations got the majority of their information from TV. But still, it's pretty sickening to think about.

>One should defend virtue against the preachers of virtue: they are its worst enemies. For they teach virtue as an ideal for everyone; they take from virtue the charm of rareness, inimitableness, exceptionalness and unaverageness-its aristocratic magic. One should also take a stand against the obdurate idealists who eagerly knock on all vessels and are satisfied when they ring hollow: what naivete to demand the great and rare and then to establish, with rage and misanthropy, that they are absent

Not really. I don't know why you think that getting information from news or articles is any better. People in the newspapers or television are not better informed than the average person save for some experts with their opinion pieces, but most of the time they write for an agenda. At least Youtube lets you access a large variety of independent opinions if you so wish. The websites does its best to lock you into an echo chamber with their suggestions system, but anyone with half a critical brain can easily access the best of different worlds.

I'm really glad old media is finally dying the death that it deserves. I hope internet doesn't eventually become another controlled stream of selected information, like television

>I hope internet doesn't eventually become another controlled stream of selected information
it already is

I can still call you a faggot nigger though

true

not on youtube or news sites, though.

...

That user was clearly making a deadpan joke. I always feel grateful for my comparatively mild autism on this board.

I work with my hands overnight and manage 5+ hours of audio books per shift. A good reader embellishes the text with distinct voices for characters,and that makes the story more alive and memorable. I would get motion sickness trying to read on the bus or train,so this is the best way to insert literature into my life.

>I work with my hands overnight
t. Roxanne

You definitely cannot engage a text by audiobook better than by reading.
Then, I think a good audiobook could be akin to a radioplay. Even better an author reading their work could be like a stand-up comic.

I am very tired, you know what I'm getting at.

1. People do this so that they can multitask, usually using only the less important books for this. This allows them more information, especially doing this alongside second nature things like cooking.

2 you're correct on this one. Again, though, it is with less important books so they can overall read more.

3. This gives a brief introduction to the subject. Sometimes it has helped me, if I want to really understand some technical subject, to listen passively, and then go back and read it.

4. ADD is an actual illness, albeit over diagnosed and often confused with a short attention span. Clearly you get more out of a physical book, but this is so that they can absorb more information.

TL;DR: OP is actually a snob, and is attempting to critique a "culture" s/he does not understand.

Thank you for this post, and I agree that it's perfectly fine to read maybe simple fiction, pop-science or introductory texts, but the fact that there's a market for ALL kinds of books means there's demand for them.

I'm not a snob at all, I was very happy when I found out audiobooks were becoming popular. Then I listened to a few...

And the culture is very clear. I checked reddit and found the most popular comments were in line with what I described.

I want to give you the benefit of the doubt here, but I really can't believe people are listening to classic literature while ACTIVELY engaged in some other activity.

I listened through the Art of War while cleaning my house, but I can't imagine trying to do something like that while, say, tweeting.

If you've described them accurately then you can count me on your pretentious side.

>google got rid of the "view image" button because stock image sites got big mad about it.

Yeah audiobooks aren't as good as regular books. You are right that you don't get all of the signs you would reading. I find that my mind wanders while listening to audiobooks, which can be very beneficial as it gives me time to think critically about the subject and new ideas come, connections are made. My mind can also wander to narcissistic withdraw if I am not careful.
They are great for long car rides and pulling weeds, not as good as lectures, but still good.
I never listen to fictitious books, only philsophy and political, even then not very often. I've listened to some of that audible anarchist on the youtubes latley. I mostly listen to seminars, lectures, relating to my focuses in the life sciences and philsophy.
Audiobooks are no good for scholarship but they aren't worthless.
Is this pasta?