Binge-reading: Fact or Fiction?
We are all uncomfortably familiar with binge-watching, but have you considered ‘binge-reading’? It’s a term coined by Manjula Martin in the Oyster Review, and involves reading “one author’s non-linked novels in one continuous flurry”. Binge-reading is an example of what a few companies believe is the future of textual media: Netflix. Or more specifically, the subscription model.
All-you-can-eat subscription models have been the life jacket for media industries put into an existential spin by the internet. We’ve seen it resurrect the music industry (Spotify, Apple Music) and is doing the same for film and TV (NowTV, Netflix, Amazon Prime). As the ebook market matures, when are we going to see the ‘Netflix for books’?
Two companies have already tried. Oyster (publisher of Oyster Review mentioned above) billed themselves as such, before shutting down in 2015, and Scribd recently relaunched their buffet subscription option, giving access to thousands of ebook titles from the big 5 for a one off monthly fee.
However, despite a concerted effort, Netflix for books has yet to be the bolt of lightning that many expected. Why is textual media stubbornly refusing the sweet siren song of subscription?
The reason comes down to a fundamental misconception that reading is equivalent to watching, or listening. In reality, they’re very different. Studies show that we pick up a book to identify ourselves as a reader, to improve our literacy skills, achieve recognition for our performance and deepen our knowledge of a subject area (Schutte, 2017). Reading is an activity requiring the “coordination of multiple complex cognitive functions” (Goldman, 2012).
By comparison, we binge watch a Netflix series for escapism and social conformity (Panda, 2017). The act of watching is passive resulting in ‘less mental stimulation’ (Kubey, 2002).
It turns out that not all media is created equal, nor consumed equally. Therefore it’s unsurprising when a business model that works for one form struggles to work for another.
But maybe books shouldn’t be pandering to the digital strategies of other forms of media. Perhaps reading is an exception, and that’s not a bad thing.
Goldman, C. (2012) ‘This is your brain on Jane Austen, and Stanford researchers are taking notes’, Stanford News, 7 September. Available at: https://news.stanford.edu/news/2012/september/austen-reading-fmri-090712.html. [Accessed: 14/10/2018].
Kubey, R., Csikszentmihalyi, M. (2002) “Television addiction”, Scientific American, 286(2), p. 74–81.
Schutte, N. S., Malouff, J. M. (2017) ‘Dimensions of Reading Motivation: Development of an Adult Reading Motivation Scale’, Reading Psychology, 28(5), p. 469–489.
Panda, S., Pandey, S. (2017) ‘Binge watching and college students: motivations and outcomes’, Young Consumers, 18(4), p.425–438. doi: 10.1108/YC-07–2017–00707
