Where has all the objective news gone?
Journalism reacts to the times. The push toward objectivity stems from an era when newspapers, the primary news medium, were blatantly partisan. Many were little more than voices for political parties. Hearst’s papers were accused (with some reason) of pushing the US into the Spanish American War.
With the rise of the Progressive movement and the demand for more careful regulation of industry, who was perceived (in my opinion correctly) as willing to grind a worker’s body into your canned meat rather than stop the lines when he fell, those papers looking to improve their reputaion and appeal to a broader audience by embracing objectivity.
Did they ultimately fail? Postmodernism recognized the objectivity is impossible but newspapers moved closer. Postmodernism also gave rise to politicians like Trump and yellow journalists who now label news attemping to be objective as “false news.”
So, yes, papers might want to reconsider how they present the news just as they did at the turn of the 20th Century. We can think critically and still present an objective story. As objective as possible in an age of postmodern awareness. And we should encourage this.
But it will require, I suspect, a new media with a new platform.
 Perhaps I should say post-propaganda thinking. Even in the sixties we knew the US government preferred propaganda to truth. I was on the debate team and one event was extemporaneous speaking. There were two versions, “Informative,” and “Persuasive.” We joked about the Westmorland approach. In persuasive speaking you argued “We should nuke the VC.” In objective you said, “There are two approached to ending the conflict in Viet Nam. Strafe the VC and nuke them. Here are the reasons for both.”