[n4r9]

> that doesn't make you or "democracy" better than a non-reader that may be a movie watcher addict

I dunno. There's something to be said for having the focus to sit down and read through a book. It suggests someone is a little more comfortable with their own thoughts and doesn't succumb to constant tech distractions. Which in turn suggests an ability to think more clearly and less emotively about politics.

[paulryanrogers]

> It suggests someone is a little more comfortable with their own thoughts and doesn't succumb to constant tech distractions.

Could just as likely suggest they're affluent enough to have time to sit down and read vs listen to an audio book or just skim news in a magazine or on a screen between jobs.

[Muromec]

In other news communist propaganda can't get you don't if don't experience or fear poverty and racist takes aren't appealing if you don't suffer from either the same or ed

[derektank]

>It suggests someone is a little more comfortable with their own thoughts

Maybe. There’s been a significant backlash against popular fiction authors for writing in anything but the first person, single fixed POV recently which sort of suggests that readers don’t like having to deal with the interiority of multiple different characters. If they’re not comfortable with the bare minimum of cognitive dissonance are they really doing much thinking, or just letting the text wash over them as someone does while watching a YouTube video?

[Chu4eeno]

Apparently not enough focus to sit down and check if the studies were comparable (time and cohort)...