Braille being an exception to this rule of course.

I'll go with a soft no -- because your actively reading is (uh oh) "listening" to your own "voice" in your head. Anyone who reads experiences this, whether print on the page, braille, architectural plans, tea leaves, etc. 

If somebody is reading to me, then I have no choice but to accept her or his voice either in place of mine or in addition to mine or challenge it as opposed to mine, etc. 

But this isn't the easiest of distinctions to make in terms of all kinds of texts. I can read Shakespeare or listen to a recording of actors reading the lines -- though neither is seeing the play, which is the superior form of "reading" it? There have been times when I've read and read and read lines from Shakespeare that have stumped me... until I heard a professional actor intone them, and then -- instant light bulb switched on.

It's not reading. It's more akin to storytime as a kid. You are listening to someone else tell a story but it isn't the same as actually reading it yourself. Both experiences can be good, but they are not the same.

Also, as noted in the posts of others, reading something yourself sparks your own imagination as to how characters look, sound, etc. Someone else presenting the story to you, whether it be reading it to you or some other medium like film, leaves you with *their* interpretation of the same and utilizes less imagination.

Audiobooks can be a nice time filler on long rides but to equate them reading is false. 

It's also a passive act where actual reading is active.  The voice over actor is doing a lot of the heavy lifting for you in an audio book, but I have to supply all of that as a reader.  I'm not denigrating one over the other, but they are different forms of consuming the same story. 

Here's the thing for me: I'd rather actually read a book than listen to it on Audible unless it's autobiographical read by the person about whom the book is about. In that case, I think it would be fascinating to hear them tell their own story.  That's kinda where I am.  And I don't consider listening to be the same as physically reading a book.  Call me old school.  Wouldn't be the first time!

But that's not the same thing at all. Audio Books (when unabridged) and Braille are exactly the same words as the original books; films are not. 

Seriously? Must check the rule book at my book club in the future then to see what else is considered "cheating". 

If i watch a film adaptation of a book, it doesn`t mean i have read the book!

***

I first saw the movie, THE GODFATHER, many times over, before reading the original novel. And when I did, I found it impossible not to "hear" the actors, not to "see" the actors, not to fully imagine virtually everything through the prism of Coppola's movie. I can't honestly assess whether I've truly read the book! 

But that's because the movie was so faithful to the book (excepting one un-filmed digression). When it comes to something like BREAKFAST A TIFFANY'S, though ...!