#also PIAAC being kind of the Big Source for this it's relevant once again that OP clearly wasn't using them as the primary source for

[serpentinegraphite]

Okay, I'm having trouble matching sources for all of OP's claims.

I'm certainly not calling OP a liar or claiming that American Education Is Good, Actually, because I'm pretty familiar with the commonly cited statistic that American adults can't read above a 5th grade level (here's a snopes article sourcing some Gallup data and the linked PIAAC data that's a little more readable especially if you're on mobile), but it's worth emphasizing here that:

The PIAAC skills results (i.e., proficiency levels) do not specifically correspond to measures such as grade levels at school. The PIAAC proficiency levels have a use-oriented conception of competency and focus on describing what types of tasks adults at each level can typically do and their ability to apply information from the task to accomplish goals they may encounter in everyday life; for example, identifying a job search result that meets certain criteria.

The PIAAC does test comprehension and proficiency for interpreting data (not just vocab, as many of the replies and reblogs first expected), and while the US is decently behind the top two countries measured this way (Japan and Finland), it's ahead of the international average for this metric.

The second source link also suggests some heavy deficits in how US education teaches children to read (and makes what seem to me compelling arguments for improvements, though I don't specialize in early childhood education and am not familiar enough to judge their relevance), but does not contextualize this or compare it to any kind of international average.

I understand the initial distress of OP's claim that Americans can't read above an elementary school level, but journalists and publications are fully aware of this, and many have guidelines and standards for writing that take that into account (e.g. in my journalism classes, I was told to aim for a 6th grade reading level or lower and shown specific guidelines for how to make information accessible and minimize jargon. The US government and CDC aim specifically for 3rd–5th grade reading levels. The NYT aims higher, and your local publications may vary, but news is meant to be accessible, so the range could be closer to a 5th—9th grade reading level on average). Therefore, it's not at all accurate that people below a 6th grade reading level only have access to TV and video.

More accurately to the PIAAC data, 18% or so might have trouble with being able to read simple articles or web pages, but once again the US meets the PIAAC international average here (23% at literacy level 1 or below).

I've done my best to review the PIAAC data, but I'm simply not finding any backing for the claim that 55% of US adults cannot read long texts at all.

This appears to be a pretty clear misinterpretation of the data.

Quick question, genuine question:

Why on earth does "more than half of US adults under 30 cannot read above an elementary school level" not strike horror into the heart of everyone who hears it?

Are the implications of it unclear????

I'm serious, people keep reacting with a sort of vague dismissal when I point this out, and I want to know why!

If adults in the US cannot read, then the only information they have access to is TV and video, the spaces with the most egregious and horrific misinformation!

If they cannot read, they cannot escape that misinformation.

This obscene lack of literacy should strike fear into every heart! US TV is notoriously horrific propaganda!

Is that???? Not??? Obvious???????

I know this sounds sarcastic, I know it does, but I'm completely serious here. I do not understand where the disconnect is.