Why Listening to Audiobooks Isn’t the Same as Reading—and Why That’s Okay

In recent years, the debate over whether listening to an audiobook counts as “reading” has gained significant traction. Some argue that the experience is identical, while others maintain that the two are distinct activities. At first glance, equating listening to reading might seem like an inclusive gesture, but a deeper look reveals that blurring the lines between the two can unintentionally undermine the very purpose of accessibility.

Understanding the Differences Between Reading and Listening

Reading involves decoding written symbols into language, engaging visual and cognitive skills to interpret text. Listening to audiobooks, on the other hand, relies on auditory processing to comprehend spoken words. Both methods activate overlapping neural networks, but they also engage distinct regions of the brain. According to the National Institute of Health’s article, Brain activation for reading and listening comprehension: An fMRI study of modality effects and individual differences in language comprehension, “Reading comprehension was associated with more left-lateralized activation and with left inferior occipital cortex (including fusiform gyrus) activation. Listening comprehension was associated with extensive bilateral temporal cortex activation and more overall activation of the whole cortex.”

The same article also states, “Good readers tend to be good listeners, and good listeners tend to be good readers. Behavioral studies have shown that listening and reading comprehension are two closely-related skills. As schooling increases, so does the strength of the correlation between reading and listening comprehension performance. Skilled readers retrieve phonological information faster and more automatically than less skilled readers. Successful reading relies on an interaction between decoding linguistic visual input and accessing phonological information.”

In simpler terms, visual input—reading—and audio input—listening—have some overlap in how they affect the brain, but do both affect the brain differently, and being able to both read and listen are closely-relate skills that benefit each other. This distinction underscores that reading and listening are complementary but not identical experiences.

Yet not all people are capable of one or the other, or sometimes both.  Acknowledging this is the first step in accommodations to increase accessibility in media that predominantly exists in only one format.

 

Accessibility Exists Because Needs and Abilities Differ

Audiobooks are not merely a convenience for sighted readers who lack the time to curl up with a book; they are a vital accessibility tool for those who don’t have the ability to read, regardless of the reason, but who can hear. The origins of audiobooks as a means of inclusion date back to the early 1930’s. According to History of Information, “In 1931 the U. S. Congress established the talking-book-program, intended to help blind adults who couldn’t read print.” (Emphasis mine.) The American Foundation for the Blind began recording books on records for individuals with visual impairments in 1934, though some sources say 1932, and with the first recording including Helen Keller’s Midstream. Recognizing that not everyone could read print, these efforts marked a turning point in making literature accessible to all, regardless of physical ability.

Today, audiobooks serve a broader audience, including individuals with dyslexia, chronic illnesses, or other conditions that make traditional reading difficult. Organizations like Learning Ally continue this mission, providing human-narrated audiobooks specifically for those who cannot read standard print: “Learning Ally Audiobooks, our award-winning reading app, is designed for students who learn through listening. Students who have a reading deficit, are blind, visually impaired or have a physical disability receive equitable access to grade-level content at their fingertips.” Struggling with reading…learning through listening.

These tools enable individuals to engage with literature in ways that suit their abilities, promoting inclusivity and equal access, and they could not exist without acknowledgement that reading and hearing are two distinctly different ways to take in information.  Claiming it’s all “reading” ignores different abilities. Why invest in audiobooks it if’s all just reading? Why not tell someone to just go grab a print book and read it? Because not all people have that ability.

Acknowledging that listening and reading are different isn’t a judgment—it’s an acknowledgment of reality. It recognizes the diversity of abilities and experiences without implying that one is superior to the other. Trying to conflate the two suggests that accessibility methods only have value if they mimic the “real” thing, perpetuating the idea that needing accommodations is somehow shameful. This couldn’t be further from the truth.

 

Listening and Reading: Complementary, Not Identical, Even Among Sighted Readers

As mentioned, when we read a book, we process written language through our eyes, decoding letters, words, and punctuation into meaning. This process engages different cognitive pathways than listening, which relies on the auditory system to interpret spoken words. While both are valid ways to engage with a story, the experiences are not identical. For example, reading allows for a slower, more deliberate pace of engagement, often giving readers more control over their interaction with the text. On the other hand, listening immerses the audience in tone, emotion, and pacing as interpreted by the narrator.

It’s worth considering why we use different terminology for different sensory experiences, and that the same kind of media can have different ways to consume it. We listen to a song when the primary consumption is in through our ears, and the pace is set by the artist performing the piece.  We read sheet music when primary consumption is in through our eyes, and the reader (or player) sets the pace.  We don’t call watching a movie reading, even if subtitles are present, as the primary method of consumption is watching. There’s no shame in recognizing that listening to an audiobook is, well, listening—it doesn’t diminish the experience or its value.

 

Dismantling Stigma Around Accessibility

One of the most important steps toward inclusivity is normalizing the use of accessibility methods without trying to disguise them. When we conflate listening with reading, we send the message that needing an alternative to traditional reading is something to hide. This is patronizing to those who rely on these tools and counterproductive to the goal of creating a society where accessibility is celebrated, not downplayed and hidden.

Listening to an audiobook while driving to work, cooking, or simply relaxing is not “less than” reading—it’s a different experience entirely.

How many times have you read something silently, it seemed fine, and when, upon reading it aloud, what you heard was bizarre and didn’t flow well? That’s due to the different ways our brains process different types of input, and is why we are encouraged to read poetry aloud rather than silently. Sometimes we get more out of a piece by listening, and sometimes by reading.  To ignore listening is to ignore a big part of taking in information.  To make it seem less than reading by claiming that listening is the same consumption method as reading…well, you’re sending the message that someone who can do only one is somehow lesser than.  Why else would you need to claim someone can do two things?  A person who can’t see so well and consumes media via listening can probably hear nuance better than you can, and there are fields, such as music, where this is a massive benefit.  There is nothing wrong with a vision-impaired person’s primary book consumption method being via audio…that they listen to. There is nothing wring with a hearing-impaired person’s primary book consumption being via print…that they read.

It’s okay to prefer listening to reading or to acknowledge that one’s circumstances make listening a better option. Embracing the differences rather than erasing them fosters a more honest and inclusive understanding of how people consume stories.

 

Why the Distinction Matters

As someone who is investing time and resources into producing audiobooks, I appreciate the unique benefits they bring to readers and listeners alike. Audiobooks aren’t just about convenience; they’re about ensuring that literature is available to everyone, regardless of ability. By insisting on calling listening “reading,” we diminish the importance of this accessibility tool and the work that goes into creating it.

Acknowledging the distinction doesn’t devalue listening—it highlights the strengths of both experiences. Listening to an audiobook can make stories more vivid through the narrator’s voice, tone, and emotion. It allows people to multitask or engage with literature in moments when traditional reading might not be possible. There’s no shame in choosing the method that works best for you, and there’s no need to conflate the two to validate either experience. If they were truly the same, then no one who has the option for both would have a preference.

Recognizing the distinction between reading and listening also:

•Validates experiences: Acknowledging that reading and listening are different respects the unique challenges faced by individuals with reading difficulties, validating their experiences without diminishing their struggles.

•Helps access appropriate support: Understanding the differences allows educators and policymakers to develop targeted interventions and support systems that address specific needs, rather than adopting a one-size-fits-all approach.

•Promotes inclusivity: Celebrating diverse methods of accessing information fosters an inclusive environment where all forms of engagement with literature are valued without conflating distinct experiences.

 

Acknowledging the Challenges of Illiteracy

For adults who were never taught to read, daily life presents significant obstacles. Tasks such as reading signs, filling out forms, or following written instructions become daunting. The National Center for Education Statistics reports that approximately 49% of adults in the U.S. have low literacy skills, with 19% being at level 1, and 33% being at level 2, impacting their employment opportunities and quality of life, and increasing the chance of poverty. Suggesting that listening to audiobooks is equivalent to reading inadvertently invalidates their experiences, implying that their struggles are less significant or easily overcome. Worse, it implies that people who can’t read a single word because they were never taught really can read as long as they’re able to hear.  This is appalling.

One commenter tried making the claim that literacy has nothing to do with reading, and is all about comprehending information.  First, that’s wrong.  Any reasonable person is fully aware that literacy, absent qualifiers such as “financial literacy” or “media literacy,” refers to the ability to read.  Second, is someone who is able to read able to comprehend this post? No. That’s illiterate by even that poster’s standard.  But hey, if that person can hear, then they can read, so maybe they should be quiet and get back to reading this post, eh?

Acknowledging the distinction between reading and listening ensures that the experiences of illiterate individuals are validated and that their unique challenges are understood. It also highlights the importance of providing targeted support, such as literacy programs, alongside accessibility tools.

 

Why Reading IS the Gold Standard of Information Consumption

Reading does stand as the cornerstone of information consumption due to the unparalleled independence it provides. Unlike listening, reading does not require reliance on another person to interpret material or on electronic devices that might fail due to loss of power or technical issues. The ability to read allows individuals to access written information anywhere—whether it’s following signs in a grocery store, reading a prescription label, or filling out forms. This independence underscores why literacy is essential for navigating daily life and why it remains a gold standard for accessing information.

The everyday reading we often take for granted demonstrates its ubiquity and importance. From identifying aisle signs at a grocery store to interpreting menus or street signs, reading enables seamless interaction with the world. Listening, while valuable in specific contexts, cannot replace the autonomy that literacy provides. When one can read, they can consume information without waiting for someone else to narrate it or for technology to assist. It’s overall much easier to disseminate information to the masses. This self-sufficiency is a key reason why literacy programs and initiatives remain critical worldwide.

Again, this does not mean someone who can’t read due to whatever reasons is stupid, but it does acknowledge a distinct advantage to being able to read. Acknowledging this is the first step toward trying to figure out a solution to elevate the independence of people who can’t read to the level of those who can.  Refusing to acknowledge this different is a refusal to acknowledge the privilege of being able to read.

 

Reading as a Gateway to Independence

Literacy fosters not only independence but also empowerment. Studies show that individuals who can read are more likely to secure stable employment, manage finances, and make informed decisions about health and wellness (if you have several days with little to do, read the National Center for Education Statistics’s Adult Literacy and Lifeskills Survey). Reading is the foundation for understanding complex documents, accessing educational opportunities, and even voting—NEED I SAY MORE IN THAT?!  HUH?!?! DO I?!?!?!—tasks that listening alone cannot fully replace. Those with good support systems to help them effectively replace the ability to read with the ability to listen and comprehend well are in a better place and are harder to fool than “the uneducated” that a certain orange fascist loves, but they still rely on some degree of assistance, whether through a third party or unreliable technological assistance. The autonomy of literacy strengthens communities and reduces dependence on others for basic tasks, contributing to personal and societal advancement.

Again, acknowledging reading as the gold standard doesn’t imply that those who cannot read are intellectually inferior. Helen Keller, who was both blind and deaf, is a prime example of how intelligence and comprehension are not tied solely to traditional reading. Keller consumed media through tactile communication, learning from her teacher, Anne Sullivan (as a kid, I wanted to grow up to be Anne, to be a teacher for deaf-blind students, and I spent so much time learning about it, learning to “read” braille, to learn the feel of the Ameslan alphabet in my hand…) a to interpret letters spelled into her hand. Despite Keller’s sensory limitations, she graduated with honors from Radcliffe College (now part of Harvard University) and became an acclaimed author and advocate for disability rights. Her achievements demonstrate that intelligence and resourcefulness transcend traditional sensory inputs. Despite not being able to listen to audiobooks or to read print, she did such amazing things. But she also had a family who didn’t sugar-coat what she couldn’t do, and who used that to find ways to educate her to the fullest. Once more, the first step to helping elevate is to honestly assess what individuals can do. Saying one kind of skill is another obfuscates where a person needs accommodations, making it harder, if not impossible, to accommodate them and include them.

 

Combating Stigma Against Nontraditional Reading Methods

Stigma surrounding disabilities, especially those that affect vision or literacy, can create unnecessary barriers. Many individuals who rely on audiobooks or other accessibility tools feel pressure to claim they “read” as a way to avoid judgment. This highlights the societal tendency to undervalue nontraditional methods of consuming information. Recognizing that alternative methods, such as listening, are valid and valuable does not diminish the importance of reading—it strengthens the case for supporting accessibility while continuing to champion literacy.

By promoting reading as the gold standard while respecting alternative methods, we create an inclusive framework that values independence without perpetuating stigma. Reading offers unmatched autonomy, but alternative approaches like audiobooks or tactile communication tools like those used by Keller ensure that everyone can engage with the world in a meaningful way. Literacy is a goal to strive for, but the ability to consume information in any form deserves respect and acknowledgment rather than to be hidden.

 

A Call for Honest Inclusivity

True inclusivity means celebrating accessibility for what it is: a way to make the world more open and equitable for everyone. It means recognizing that disabilities or differences in ability are not flaws but part of the spectrum of human experience. It also means respecting the integrity of accessibility methods by acknowledging their unique qualities instead of attempting to frame them as identical to the activities they adapt.

By recognizing the distinction between reading and listening, we affirm the importance of audiobooks as an accessibility tool and as an art form in their own right. Listening is not “less than.” It’s listening—and that’s something to celebrate.

 

To disclose, I have synesthesia.

When I hear most sound, especially music, I hear it as colors and shapes more than as sound the way that you do. Listening to audiobooks, but especially music, often makes my brain activate the same parts as visual media. When playing the piano, I sometimes adapt my own sheet music to the colors and shapes my brain associates with different sounds.  That makes it easier for me to play.  Sometimes, while reading, I’ll experience that as physical motion or shapes.  If sound and visual affected the brain in the same locations and in the same way, then this wouldn’t exist.

Sometimes I need to stop reading quietly and read aloud instead so I can hear the words—I am technically listening to the words though the words are coming from my own mouth.

When I hear a song as colors or shapes, that’s still hearing a song, not seeing a song.

When I color-code my sheet music and experience that as sound, I’m still reading it, not hearing it.

I’m working on a music degree right now, and there are no accommodations for this.

I understand VERY well the differences in different ways to consume various media, and claiming it’s all the same does me a huge disservice, just as it does a disservice to someone who can’t see by claiming that they read just fine. It obscures the accommodations needed behind the gross idea that you must be sighted and able to read to be “normal.”

 

This is why I am working on audiobooks.

Because I’m not afraid to acknowledge that there are many, many people out there who struggle to read or who literally can’t read, but who can listen, and because I want to enable them to have a way to engage. There is nothing wrong with them for not being able to read. There is nothing wrong with someone who can’t hear and can only read. If I were to have someone who couldn’t read text or listen to an audiobook, but who could consume media by touching braille, I would do what I could to put these books into braille format, even if it were to mean Perkins brailler and typing an entire book out myself (and consider it an honor that someone loved these books enough to get someone who was blind-deaf to have such an interest). Acknowledging different abilities, rather than stigmatizing, is truly the first step toward making progress on inclusivity and accessibility.

Some people need to listen to audiobooks to consume media, and this is okay. That is where their ability to consume is, and that is okay. We don’t need to call it what it’s not—we normalize different needs and abilities by calling them what they are, and then doing our best to increase what’s available to them.

And if anyone wants to continue insisting they’re the same, go tell Oliver James, a functionally illiterate adult who taught himself to read, that he was really actually able to read all along since there are audiobooks.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

search previous next tag category expand menu location phone mail time cart zoom edit close