Is the 'Death of Reading' Narrative Wrong? (www.persuasion.community)
- Reference: 0180754884
- News link: https://news.slashdot.org/story/26/02/07/2310212/is-the-death-of-reading-narrative-wrong
- Source link: https://www.persuasion.community/p/reading-isnt-dead
> As a psychologist, I used to study claims like these for a living, so I know that the mind is [3]primed to believe narratives of decline. We have a much lower standard of evidence for "bad thing go up" than we do for "bad thing go down." Unsurprisingly, then, stories about the end of reading tend to leave out some inconvenient data points. For example, book sales were [4]higher in 2025 than they were in 2019, and only a bit below their high point in the pandemic. Independent bookstores are [5]booming , not busting; at least [6]422 new indie shops opened in the United States last year alone. Even Barnes & Noble is [7]cool again .
>
> The actual data on reading, meanwhile, isn't as apocalyptic as the headlines imply. Gallup surveys [8]suggest that some mega-readers (11+ books per year) have become moderate readers (1-5 books per year), but they don't find any other major trends over the past three decades. Other surveys document similarly moderate declines. For instance, data from the National Endowment for the Arts finds a slight decrease in the percentage of U.S. adults who read any book in 2022 (49%) compared to 2012 (55%). And the American Time Use Survey shows a dip in reading time from 2003 to 2023. Ultimately, the plausibility of the "death of reading" thesis depends on two judgment calls. First, do these effects strike you as big or small...? The second judgment call: Do you expect these trends to continue, plateau, or even reverse...?
>
> There are signs that the digital invasion of our attention is beginning to stall. We seem to have [9]passed peak social media — time spent on the apps has started to slide. App developers are finding it harder and harder to squeeze more attention out of our eyeballs, and it turns out that having your eyeballs squeezed hurts , so people aren't sticking around for it... Fact #2: Reading has already survived several major incursions, which suggests it's more appealing than we thought. Radio, TV, dial-up, Wi-Fi, TikTok — none of it has been enough to snuff out the human desire to point our pupils at words on paper... It is remarkable, even miraculous, that people who possess the most addictive devices ever invented will occasionally choose to turn those devices off and pick up a book instead.
The author mocks the "death of reading" hypothesis for implying that all the world's avid readers "were just filling time with great works of literature until TikTok came along."
[1] https://www.persuasion.community/p/reading-isnt-dead
[2] https://www.experimental-history.com/
[3] https://www.experimental-history.com/p/the-end-is-nigh-and-heres-why
[4] https://www.nytimes.com/2025/12/30/books/book-sales-trends-2025.html
[5] https://www.uschamber.com/co/good-company/launch-pad/modern-bookstore-revival
[6] https://www.nytimes.com/2025/12/30/books/book-sales-trends-2025.html
[7] https://www.honest-broker.com/p/what-can-we-learn-from-barnes-and
[8] https://news.gallup.com/poll/388541/americans-reading-fewer-books-past.aspx
[9] https://www.statista.com/statistics/433871/daily-social-media-usage-worldwide/?srsltid=AfmBOopEzO-1c-7tBamdgwBhVr9encJpUTLHW4lAw06omwHM0D1DIQvl
Book Sales != Books Read (Score:1)
I buy books all the time that I don't end up reading. To count the number of book sales and equate that with book read is incorrect.
Re: (Score:2)
> I buy books all the time that I don't end up reading.
?
Re: (Score:3)
It might surprise you, but that's a common thing. People get interested in books, but then don't make up time for reading. A long time ago as graduate student I did not have internet at home, I was purchasing *and* reading a book every week, whether an essay or a novel. Now I have internet and also a busy life, and I can't make up time for reading anymore. I probably could, but there so many other things I can push forward even on nights and week-ends: my main job, my side hustle, a hobby (e.g. street photo
Still reading here (Score:1)
I'll read a book a day, or more, whenever I'm staying in hospital because they won't let me have electronic devices near the medical equipment and I'd be bored out of my brain otherwise.
Repeated story every 20 years (Score:5, Informative)
Every 20 years or so, we get a "Death of Reading".
Printing press caused the death of reading by creating newspapers and cheap pamphlets.
Mass produced Paper back books...
Comic Books...
Color Magazines ...
The internet...
Smart Phones...
No. People that want to read, still read. The common folk that never read the 'right' words never read what the elitists think they should read. Book sales remain steady - though formats do change. We have a lot more ebooks and a lot less mass market paperbacks than we did 40 years ago.
Re: (Score:3)
> Every 20 years or so, we get a "Death of Reading".
> Printing press caused the death of reading by creating newspapers and cheap pamphlets.
> Mass produced Paper back books...
> Comic Books...
> Color Magazines ...
> The internet...
> Smart Phones...
> No. People that want to read, still read. The common folk that never read the 'right' words never read what the elitists think they should read. Book sales remain steady - though formats do change. We have a lot more ebooks and a lot less mass market paperbacks than we did 40 years ago.
And as usual, the argument on both sides can sometimes be lacking nuance.
On on hand, it is not a "death" of reading, probably a reduction.
And on the other hand, these panics every 20 years are not without basis, and probably worthy of some concern.
Re: (Score:2)
I will add that on the "upper end" of reading, those of use who read enormous quantiles of books, we by and large had migrated to ebook subscription services and there's been recently a bit of death of those.
They were fine and fun through most of the pandemic but then apparently AI because just "good enough" that those books that were kind poorly written by amateurs could suddenly be written by AI. Sadly those books are just terrible.
Maybe we'll go back to paperbacks, but I'm not sure. Hard to say when yo
Reading will return (Score:2, Troll)
When your residential blocks electricity is on only 4 days a week in order to feed AI data centers, then we'll start trading books and reading again.
Re: (Score:2)
> Reading will return (Score:2, Troll)
I wonder what the highest Troll rating you can get on Slashdot is.
I suppose you have to be modded Troll (which lowers the mod points), and then modded "Underrated" several times...?
Wrong (Score:1)
There's not a public librarian or public school teacher that would agree with this. Libraries have shifted to video games and audio books and graphic novels because their upcoming base no longer reads (280char twitter nonsense doesn't count as reading). Public School teachers no longer assign book reports because their moronic snowflakes can not be bothered to read a full classic and then summarize it to write a simple report. Mastroianni lives in some fantasy researcher world that has no bearing on the
Re: (Score:2)
Is it true that long ago firemen put fires out instead of starting them?
Re:Wrong (Score:5, Interesting)
> Public School teachers no longer assign book reports because their moronic snowflakes can not be bothered to read a full classic and then summarize it to write a simple report
Are you a parent, and has this been your kid's experience? Because that's definitely not my middle-schooler's experience. She's on her fourth book of the school year for which she'll need to write a report.
I don't doubt there are other schools out there that have had to abandon book reports, but I wonder how widespread it is. We're not in a particularly competitive school district (unlike our neighbors), so I don't think there's anything special about the kids in this school.
Books are Dead (Score:2, Insightful)
When reading 11 books per year makes you a mega-reader and even 1 book a year makes you a moderate reader I think we can safely conclude that reading is dead.
Throughout the 80s and 90s I consistently read 1-2 books per week, and so did most of my friends. Granted most people read less but a book every few weeks was totally normal.
Nowadays I read maybe a quarter of the articles in 4 online newspapers every morning, listen to the odd audiobooks but otherwise it is all video. If I had the same access to video
real stats (Score:2)
According to Goodreads via my Kindle...
I read 85,323 pages in 155 books in 2025, down from 104,792 pages in 236 books in 2024. I was mostly retired in 2024 taking care of my mother.
I know I read more than a few physical books but I am too lazy to input them manually into Goodreads.
Re: (Score:2)
Did Goodreads/Kindle take into account the variable number of words on a "page" due to ebook formatting?
In print books, since mass market printing appeared, the number of words on a page is fairly well defined due to standard physical page sizes, typefaces, spacing and margins. This makes it possible to have a reasonably objective definition of pages of content, modulo a small number of variations in book formats across publishers: So we all have a rough idea of how many words can be crammed into an avera
Re: (Score:2)
Good point. I usually read at 5 pt font which is smaller than the default but your point is very valid. I checked and GR doesn't track anything of real value beyond the number of pages in a printed volume, but many are e-books only so who knows...
Reading is made easier by technology (Score:2)
Reading has been my main hobby for over 50 years.
The last few decades it has become easier due to eBooks.
My failing vision is less of an issue, and the cost is a lot more reasonable.
I think that if children are rationed on screen time, that should not include reading ebooks.
I read mostly Science Fiction, and a little bit of history.
Preferably Space Opera/Galactic Empire/ space fleet and alternative history.
"mega-readers (11+ books per year)"
LOL I have read at least 5 books so far this month (from NEW to REA
Re: (Score:2)
The cost of ebooks is not more reasonable, if you compare it with what physical books used to cost. It is more reasonable if you compare it against the currently inflated cost of physical books.
Re: (Score:2)
> Reading has been my main hobby for over 50 years.
> The last few decades it has become easier due to eBooks.
> My failing vision is less of an issue, and the cost is a lot more reasonable.
> I think that if children are rationed on screen time, that should not include reading ebooks.
> I read mostly Science Fiction, and a little bit of history.
> Preferably Space Opera/Galactic Empire/ space fleet and alternative history.
> "mega-readers (11+ books per year)"
> LOL I have read at least 5 books so far this month (from NEW to READ) plus reread some old classic by authors like RAH
That is impressive... and admirable.
I would like to increase my reading, but I am sometimes put off by the cost of books (even ebooks). I have looked into libraries, and they often have a good collection of ebooks which can be read online at no cost, but as often as not, the book I am looking for is not available in the library as an ebook.
Please share your secrests for (a) keeping the cost down, and (b) making time to read.
Re: (Score:2)
My two cents (not the OP):
The best way to keep costs down (legally) is to make a list of your local second hand bookstores and visit them in person. They can be specialized, but depending on your interests this means you have to hunt for the most suitable one.
When you visit, do not be put off by the books being in used condition, and sometimes in rough shape. You want to read them (presumably), not collect them. Since these bookstores also accept to buy books, you can recoup a percentage of the cost late
Unmistakable and Irrefutable Decline (Score:2)
Decline in reading by school age children is substantial, NAEP reading scores for older students have hit historic lows.
In 2024–2025 data releases:High school seniors (12th graders) had the lowest average reading scores since tracking began in 1992.
Only about 35% of 12th graders performed at or above "proficient" in reading, with around a third scoring below basic levels.
A problem from parenting, devices , and schools.
.Reading for pleasure has plummeted dramatically:Among 13-year-olds, the share
Reading of fiction does not tell much (Score:1)
People reading (potentially lots of) fictional books may prove that they are able to read, but that does not tell us whether (1) they have good reading comprehension and could learn from non-fictional texts, it also does not tell us whether (2) they are able to communicate actively. And it is (1) and (2) that I am most concerned with in young colleagues, with a recent addition of (3) have they outsourced thinking to LLMs? I really would not mind working with people who never read a single book, as long as t
The Death of Reading (Score:3)
...has been greatly exaggerated. (to paraphrase Mr. Twain)
Source: I own a bookstore.
Short attention span is a real thing. It has effected me and many others of my age. Personal computers, the internet, and mobile phones all came along during our lives. When I was young there was no (publicly accessible) internet, a trip to the library was a rare event, and no one was going to waste good money buying a book for a child. As I grew up and had my own means, books became plentiful in my life. As a teen BBSs came about. Downloads took FOREVER for even something simple. ... Now everything is available online instantly. Information and entertainment in short, easy, bites. I certainly feel the urge to switch topics as soon as something becomes "boring", to sample and move on.
But... people still read. The more educated people read a lot as they grew up and throughout their studies, and it is a habit they have maintained. Those who struggled thru high school barely read then, and don't read now. The children who grew up with phones and tablets in hand, they DEMAND that their parents buy them real physical books. There are definitely generations in the middle who just don't read -anything. They proudly announce that they have never read an entire book in their lives. But, fortunately, they are not everyone. Reading is a habit for some, and not for others.
Judgement calls (Score:2)
Like the "slight decrease in the percentage of U.S. adults who read any book in 2022 (49%) compared to 2012 (55%)", which is a decline of more than 10% in 10 years? I wouldn't call that a "slight" decrease in any meaning of the word.
Also, as others already noted, when reading 11 books per year is supposed to constitute a "mega-reader" then this very much looks like someone purposefully belittling the problem.
I read tons, just not on paper. (Score:2)
I don't even know where I could even get a hardcopy version of Moses T. Runnels' two-volume History of Sanbornton, New Hampshire , totaling around 1,700 pages or so and published in 1882. But I frequently consult the PDF version I downloaded from one of the numerous web sites that has it available. Then there's my OverDrive Libby account, which gives me access to the holdings of something like eight library networks covering virtually all of a state, plus a university library or two. I voraciously consume
Sounds like hogwash (Score:2)
...but I didn't read it. - Former Avid Reader
Reading more than ever (Score:2)
I read more but w than I have in my past 50-some years. The difference for me was an electronic device, and a well known one you’ve certainly heard of, and some of you probably hate. It’s so easy to have a dozen or more books with me, they don’t weigh a ton, and I don’t need to worry about needing light to read by. I read an average of 20-25 books per year now. It’s replaced a fair bit of tv/movies/gaming for me.
Reading books, or reading per se? (Score:2)
Because I've gone from chewing my way through every book in the library to maybe one or two a year.
"Number of words read", now, that's an entirely different metric. As is "Number of words written". But that's a whole 'nother kettle of fish. Fish, well, that's a different story.
Re: (Score:3)
There are ten links in this summary. What is the method by which you decide the first sentence of the third link is the one that makes you decide whether to keep reading or not?
Re: (Score:3)
It was the first one to provide a quick excuse to post a top level whine.
I assume. I haven't read any of them yet.
Re: (Score:1)
It was the first one I picked up. The guy who responded to me either doesn't know that you're supposed to look at *all* the cited links when reading something critically, or he's just being argumentative.
So it doesn't matter which link it is. But in this case, like I said, the first sentence already made my head spin with warning signs, it doesn't bode well for the rest of the content. Such is life.
Re: (Score:2)
Or even just the one link used as a reference to the line he's taking such umbrage at.
Re: (Score:2)
"For".
For the line he's taking such umbrage at.
Re: (Score:2)
I decide to keep reading as long as the density of egregiously wrong statements among the words read so far is bounded by a small constant. The implications are obvious.
Re: (Score:2)
Here the first lines of another of his prose. He admits to writing stupid things online all the time, to the point he does not give his real name in job interviews. [1]https://www.experimental-histo... [experimental-history.com]
> A couple years ago, I got a job interview at a big-name university and I had to decide whether to go undercover or not. On paper, I looked like a normal candidate. But on the internet, I was saying all sorts of wacko things, like how it’s cool to ditch scientific journals and just publish your papers as blog posts instead.
[1] https://www.experimental-history.com/p/be-myself-id-rather-die
Re:Garbage (Score:4, Funny)
> This is the first line from the linked article. Complete garbage, I stopped reading after that.
Behold, the death of reading.