alt Hacker NewsI find the words consumption and content problematic. They encourage you to look at the world in a certain way. What would happen to your world view if you step outside the confines of those words, defined by advertisers who don't care about quality but instead measure clicks, engagement and profits and have encouraged the worst sort of 'content' to thrive (short form videos with very little substance)?
Most good art or writing requires engagement from the reader and something is created in engaging with it, something new that exists between the original work and the world of the reader. So I fundamentally disagree with the framing that reading is a passive activity and requires no creativity or engagement, or that creating is fundamentally different from engaging with the creations of others.
> Most good art or writing requires engagement from the reader and something is created in engaging with it
This is an interesting point, and as I said before, reading a book >> than short form content (although you could also argue a 3Blue1Brown video watched intentionally could also provide some level of engagement, while still being categorically different than creating a video or novel in the first place). I would agree that the best forms of art, whether in novels or music or otherwise, invite some level of creative participation. But that is rare, and it's still (in my opinion) a fundamentally different and constrained form of creativity.
> I find the words consumption and content problematic.
They're just words, they're appropriate here, and they had meaning long before digital ads.
That being said, your needless hostility suggests you attach a significant amount of ego to reading. Maybe you aren't aware of that, so I leave it as an observation here. If you like reading books, no one here is questioning your life decisions. If you use reading to signal superiority, well, that's a whole different issue.