There are multiple history podcasts, some of which are made by actual historians, which go for hundreds of episodes. It might not be "reading a book" but I really fail to see the big difference between that and an audiobook. Except that it's cheaper/easier/better than using Audiobooks.
I listen to lectures about health from doctors. Casually listening to a lecture simply wasn't something you could just do not so long ago. Is listening to a 2 hour lecture summarising information about a health topic I'm interested in worse than reading books?
I now have access to medical papers which used to be gate-kept by Elsevier with the complicity of higher education. Nowadays it seems like the vast majority of research papers are publicly accessible. Is reading scientific papers worse than reading books?
Maybe I should be paying Audible a subscription fee so that people think I'm erudite though. I don't think there's anything wrong with books but people fetishise them.