I personally think that though the medium is different, audiobooks are at least _similar_ to reading a book.

Screens however, are you including something like an eReader as _not_ reading books?

I disagree.

I read books, but I also read essays, newsletters, blogs, Wikipedia articles, discussions and so on. These also contain important and useful information. It's not a dichotomy between books and slop. Hell, a lot of books should have been blog posts.

Audiobooks are also valid, as are podcasts. Sure, they might not engage you like text does, but they still impart knowledge.

To me, this is like ranting against electric bikes because they're not as difficult. If they get more people to engage in a fun activity, then they serve their purpose.

Could you expand on the audiobook part?

Im assuming that screens dont count because its not novels/literature

but audio books are the same content but delivered by a different medium, I am genuinely curious as to your opinion on is not counting

Screens don't count?

The article doesn't distinguish reading books from reading anything else. Though it's pretty short and light on details. The article it cites strongly implies the reading is only books.

All that said, [I find] reading books is overrated. They're often outdated, low effort slop, and even more so in this AI era.