I could imagine many arguments on why ereading isn't "reading". The thing is, the author of the article seems to be obsessed with things that may contribute to the reading experience but isn't part of the function of reading.

The other issues with these arguments is that the reason why ereading isn't the same as reading, in my humble opinion, is because of current technological limitations. The current generation of ereaders shoehorn both the author and the reader into adopting certain conventions. Once the technology has improved, authors and readers will be able to use virtually all of the conventions of print and electronic media.