The Roving Theologian (no relation to Karl Rove) has more thoughts:

Well, first we have to state that we believe the statistics. Whenever a behaviour is expected (and is viewed as good), I believe it is safe to say that people over-report their participation in that behaviour. For years the “attend church or synagogue” statistics have been generally believed to be overinflated by at 100%. Church attendance in our nation is still viewed as a good and noble thing, so people say they do indeed attend, even if it is not totally true (they would attend, its just, well, things always get in the way). In the liberal wing of society reading is similarly viewed as a noble activity (I agree by the way). In conservative circles reading of books does not have that similar level of importance, and so, the numbers among conservatives are probably pretty close to accurate. I think it is likely that the numbers in liberal circles are probably inflated by some degree. But, lets say that the numbers are correct. Does that mean that conservatives don’t write or read books because we only want to hear “no new taxes”? No – in fact the conservative book publishing area has been doing better of late – with a lot of very good books being published, and some not so good ones (can we say Anne Coulter). There are some good books written in the liberal end of society, and some good books written in the conservative end – probably about the same number. Most conservative books are non-fiction, while I do believe that liberals are more well rounded – both fiction and non-fiction. Also, don forget that academics are largely (by about 90-10 ratio) liberals, and academics must read books to stay up on the current research. Nothing is more embarrassing that having your students know information than you are completely unaware of because you have not read.

And then there’s this well-taken email from a reader:

Umberto Eco has to be the king of non-reader sales. Check out the
Publisher’s Weekly review of Foucault’s Pendulum on Amazon: “If a copy
(often unread) of The Name of the Rose on the coffee table was a badge
of intellectual superiority in 1983, Eco’s second novel–also an
intellectual blockbuster–should prove more accessible.” In fact,
Foucault’s Pendulum is often unread, too.
And let’s not forget Finnegans Wake. “Since its publication in 1939,
countless would-be readers of Finnegans Wake – James Joyce’s
masterwork, which consumed a third of his life – have given up after a
few pages, dismissing it as a ‘perverse triumph of the
unintelligible,’” says the ad copy for one of the several exegeses
that are supposed to make it comprehensible.

Update: From a reader, in the name of balance:

The roving theologian likely has not read Godless, by Ann Coulter. Her section on Darwinism shows that she has done the heavy lifting intellectually on the subject. It’s a tour de force. It explains why no one has attempted to address any of her specific points, at least that I have seen so far in the published comments I have seen. Only ad hominem attacks on her.