You grazers will only read the headline for this anyways...

By Claire Cudahy

As I browse the homepage of the New York Times website, the usual array of depressing headlines stare back at me in bold, black print: "Congresswoman Giffords Shot," "High Unemployment Rates Likely to Remain the Same," "Latinos Struggle with Arizona Government."

Newspapers, magazines and online media sites are littered with the harsh realities of the world around us - a constant reminder of the darker side of life.

It is not surprising that younger generations have gravitated away from televised news to the online sphere where they can control the content they explore.

But younger generations are not alone in this selective process of searching for news. News consumers, both young and old, have turned to technology for succinct and up-to-date coverage. Now that laptops, iPads and smart phones are a dime a dozen, Americans tend to get their news on the go.

The rise of online media and the resulting drop in the popularity of print is old news.

However, it seems that the speed of technology has permeated not just the platform of news, but also the reading habits of many Americans.

Both on and offline, a large majority of readers have turned to skimming.

Loyalty to a single news provider and thorough readings of the newspaper are dying practices. In short, we have become news grazers.

According to new research from PEJ and the Pew Internet and American Life Project, Americans typically get their news from four to six different places - different channels, websites and print sources.

This media ADD especially applies online. Only 21 percent of Americans say they rely on one online destination for their news, while 57 percent use two to five websites.  

Moreover, with popular search engines like Google, news consumers, especially younger generations, can get much of the information they want without actually clicking the link to the story.

Instead, they read headlines or quickly skim paragraphs. Using these search engines to access the news is no longer just a means to an end, but often the end itself.

News has become less about the quality and name of the source and more about where you can find the quickest and most concise information.

Even as a writer myself, I have to fight - sometimes unsuccessfully - the urge to skim over stories or simply stop halfway through them.

Journalism and the media of the past have reached a point of no return.

Newspapers and magazines have been forced to adapt to the Internet craze, employing bloggers and writers for their websites - no longer a place for second or third- string writers.

Journalists must write with most readers' short attention spans in mind.

Advancements in society have allowed for a vast amount of information to circulate through the media in its various forms, and this surplus of knowledge can be overwhelming. Readers have been forced to adapt.

With the increased documentation of... ­well, just about everything, thanks to social media sites like Facebook and Twitter, the definition of "news" has changed immensely in the last decade.

One could argue that the increase in coverage is beneficial to our society.

But when it comes down to it, are we really doing ourselves good by superficially reading a dozen articles instead of thoroughly understanding a few?

If instant gratification in other facets of life has taught us anything, I would have to say no.

Claire Cudahy is a junior English major.