It's a record-breaking year for TV news. The average television station is now airing an average of 5.18 hours of local news – an increase of 18 minutes from last year – according to an RTDNA/Hofstra University annual survey.

But let's not prematurely celebrate this increase in quantity without first asking: Is anyone measuring the quality of this news coverage? Do additional minutes on the news clock actually make viewers more informed? Are TV stations using this added time to air important, ground-breaking news stories?

Nope. Even the Federal Communications Commission's recent report on the “future of media” noted, “An abundance of media outlets does not translate into an abundance of reporting. In many communities, there are now more outlets, but less local accountability reporting.” 

Confused about how more news is less news? Let me explain how TV stations are setting records without actually improving. 

First, it's important to point out that commercials take up a huge swath of air time during newscasts—about eight minutes out of every 30—and that’s before you get to weather, sports and entertainment reports. Advertising revenue for broadcasters has ballooned, but companies have failed to reinvest these billions into journalism, laying off reporters in droves. The FCC's report concludes that rather than “increase the pool of reporters who could cover their communities and more effectively monitor institutions and government agencies, many stations have opted to let those dollars simply flow to the bottom line." So as ad sales rise, so does their “record” amount of “news time,” meaning the opportunity for more legitimate news is there, but we're not getting it. 

And those are just the commercials that we know about. Increasingly, local TV stations are airing advertising that is embedded in news segments and disguised as real news. We call this “fake news.” The products and segments are never disclosed to the viewers as paid advertisements, and understaffed newsrooms all over the country are increasingly airing fake news because it saves them the time and expense of producing real news that serves the public interest. There have been more than a hundred documented cases of fake news, meaning we're getting less news than we think. 

The FCC report also documented broadcasters' fake news enterprise: 

We found instances in which local stations appeared to sell their news time, and reputation, to advertisers—in some cases literally allowing sponsors to buy their way into news segments. Too many local TV station executives and managers have responded to financial pressures from owners by allowing advertisers to dictate—and in some cases to create—content, undermining long-standing journalistic standards.

We also have to take into consideration the dozens of TV stations across the country that are “sharing” news in their community, giving viewers the same stories, viewpoints, videos, and even news anchors on multiple stations. This is called “covert consolidation,” with TV newsrooms quietly merging operations and circumventing media consolidation rules so they can cut costs and produce a single, shared newscasts. The result? You got it. Less news than we think.

The FCC's report noted how harmful news sharing can be for actual news:

Increasingly, cooperative news services are not only sharing footage from official events but also interviews, so stories on three different stations might feature the same newsmaker interview. And, as noted above, when a pool sends only a camera person, not a reporter, it is less likely to get the story behind the story—or an angle other than the one of- ficials choose to show the public. 

Shave off some time for commercials, hack off a little more for embedded advertising, cut out the shared stories, and we've got bare-boned news outlets. That 5.18 hour record is looking a little less impressive, and we haven't even touched on the vapid, celebrity-obsessed, gossip-based junk news that is passed off as real reporting.