To say that reading on a kindle is NOT screen time

[BlingLoving]

This has come up again recently where a parent has expressed concern because her child is choosing to read on a kindle and therefore her "screen time" is going up. I double checked - if the child was reading a regular book, mum would have no issue.

Surely reading is reading? I just find this mind blowing.

I have no issue with people who don't like Kindles and prefer real books. But I can't get my head around the idea that reading on a Kindle doesn't count as "real" reading!? Is it just me?

An e-reader with no additional functionality = a book to me. DC2 has one of these, was allowed to read it at school and take it on the Y6 residential because it is a collection of books, nothing more. Now DC2 is at secondary school and they've been allowed to read it in class on the same basis.

I think it depends on the context. DD uses Kindle Paperwhite, she’s got vision problems and from vision pov her reading on a kindle counts as screen time, it’s better then scrolling her phone or being on a laptop but still it’s a strain. She’s less tied when reading a book. From reading pov Kindle is pure reading.
I’ve also asked a sleep consultant specifically about reading on Kindle and he said that it does counts as a screen time. I was actually surprised a bit.

Hard to say as I don’t know what kindles are like these days. I got one several years ago, it does nothing but display downloaded kindle books. It’s got a weird soft light that looks like a book page and doesn’t affect my eyes in the same way that long stretches of computer/tablet/phone screens do. I would never worry about a child using it nor would I count it as screen time. Guessing from responses here though that there may be different types of Kindles, so maybe the others are different?

If you’re using the word screen time in the common way that we use it these days - to describe the amount of time someone uses their phone / tv / tablet for entertainment or gaming purposes” then no it doesn’t count as screen time at all.

If the only concern is was to do with the lighting and / or the screen impact on eyes then might be an idea to limit or to replace with one which is safer.

Screen time can still affect the eyes differently and the last research I read that comprehension and retention were significantly better with the haptic quality of paper books. Anecdotally, I find DC take less in and understand less when reading off a Kindle.

Totally different. Isn't the point that it's the same as a reading an actual book?!

I think it depends - I have a kindle Paperwhite and consider that non screen time as the tech isn't the same as my ipad. It's just a type of book for me. I do turn the light down esp as night though.

@WidowTwonky

It is sceentime, seems obvious

Why?

If you’re using the word screen time in the common way that we use it these days - to describe the amount of time someone uses their phone / tv / tablet for entertainment or gaming purposes” then no it doesn’t count as screen time at all.

Yes, this is exactly what I was referring to. And I know a number of people who believe it does. eg, "you can spend 1 hour on screens, watching youtube/playing minecraft/reading your kindle but after that you have to play with your toys or read a [paper] book."

For those who wish it felt like a book, I have come to love the smallness and lightness of my kindle. So much easier to read with one hand etc.

Agree re reading a kindle - I was really not convinced until someone gave me one. I also love being able to read with the light off (if I can't sleep), and not taking 6 paperbacks on holiday!

When I talk about the physical sensation of holding a book, it's the smell and textures too. I'm a true bibliophile and if I had my way the entire house would be wall to wall with bookshelves. However I've had to content myself with my few collectibles (in the true sense, some are worth very decent money if I could be parted from them) and a vast library on my kindle.

I still stand by my comment that a true e-reader is not remotely like screen time in terms of eye damage/fatigue. It has no blue light and the dot density purposefully mirrors print.

I basically mean that reading a book on an electronic device vs reading a book that's paper are the same thing in my view. Potential issues with poor lighting/screen aside - but that's not a "screen time" issue to my mind it's just the 21st century version of my dad yelling at us not to read in poor light or using a torch under the covers!

It's not about poor lighting, but about whether the device is emitting a bright light, in which case the recommendations around screens and eyes/headaches/similar potential risks still apply in a way that doesn't apply to books or readers that aren't backlit. My DD2 has reading sunglasses which she has used at school because many of the devices used there are really bright to her and she can't adjust them as we have at home.

For me, it depends on the age of the child - younger kids, I don't let them take electronic devices away from adults and so yes, I restrict all personal screen time in the same way even though they can have books in their room or whereever else in the house or outside - a children's book is likely not going to cost a significant amount to replace and ruin everyone else's time too.

It's different with teenagers, but even there - it isn't so much about ereaders not being reading, it's that electronics can do so many things and they have had to rely on them to do so much in these last couple of years that there is part of me that actively tries to encourage any other option. Like yeah, reading, learning, and socializing electronically can be better than cackling over videos, but it can get concerning when that's how they're doing all of that.

A proper kindle does not count as screen time. It is reading and doesn’t have the light and eye strain concerns.

Our dd even started carrying her kindle to school in year 2 because it was so much lighter than toting back and forth her current personal reading book, especially if she was near the end and might need to bring two. Her teacher was fine with it. She would pull it out and read whenever she finished her work early.

I wish people would stop saying "screens" in such a mealy-mouthed disapproving manner to refer to TV, films and gaming, full stop. It is not all negative and brain-rotting.

@FruitToast

My DD's kindle fire is limited to 30 minutes a day (and she has to do 15 minutes of TT rockstars first because I'm mean like that). Her 'proper' kindle is unlimited and is in no way counted a screen time. She's often curled up in the corner with either her kindle or an actual book and possibly the only problem is her vocabulary at 6, is so extensive it rivals mine!

First time today I properly laughed, so thanks for that!

It totally depends on what kind of Kindle. If it's a tablet then it definitely counts. But if it's a normal Kindle, then it's just like reading a book so shouldn't count as screen time.

It is still screen time in the sense that it has the same neurological impact on the brain as any screen yes. That doesn't mean it's bad, but it is still screen time.

Not screen time in our house.

@WTF475878237NC

It is still screen time in the sense that it has the same neurological impact on the brain as any screen yes. That doesn't mean it's bad, but it is still screen time.

Is that really true though? On a normal Kindle, as opposed to a tablet/iPad?

It's real reading but it's still on a screen. My children have "real" books and books on their kindle so have a mixture.
I'm curious though, if mum didn't want her daughter reading on a kindle why buy her a kindle or the books to go on it.
Why not just buy an actual book?

Reading on a normal kindle isn't screen time.

Reading on a proper Kindle isn't screen time in my book.

DS1 (8) got a Kindle for Christmas and has gone from never reading for pleasure to reading loads. The ability to set the text size has made a huge difference to him (he really struggles to track a sentence in small print).