Earlier quoted context omitted.
All news is not subjective. If it was, it'd be editorial content, not news reporting (obviously, don't trust any big media outlet that doesn't make a strong distinction between the two within their own organization). Now, because reporting is the product of humans, it's inevitably going to be subjective to some degree- people still decide what to report on, what words to use when describing things, etc. Objectivity i…
You said it. Editorial choice makes an "objective news" subjective. Deciding what to publish or not is the key. I don't believe in "attempts at being objective". What is needed are newspapers clearly stating their bias so that you know where to stand when you read those.
If I was aware that I had some bias about anything, I would actively seek to counteract it. I would hope that anyone would. A bias is an inherently irrational thing. A bias is like a bug in someone's mind that by definition causes them to misinterpret things that happen in real life. A bias isn't one person caring more about something than someone else does, or one person liking something that another person doesn't like. A bias is something that gets in the way of someone perceiving reality.
If some news outlet posted a big long public statement of bias, why would anyone go to them for accurate information about anything related to that publicly stated bias? If some business news site had a statement of bias in which they came out and said that they were all total fanboys of some company and that they personally owned a lot of stock in it, but then they continued to write stories about that company and making buy or sell recommendations, I would disregard anything that news site published about that company. Wouldn't you? They'd be coming out and saying that they are putting a slant on their stories that makes them less accurate and truthful, and that they've chosen to embrace it rather than squash it.
But really the biggest problem with a purported purveyor of truth and facts about the world telling everyone what their bias is, is that nobody really knows what their biases are. Even less than they know what other people's biases are. That's why they're biases. They're things that color your perceptions and make them less accurate and real, that you aren't aware of. If you were aware of them, then presumably they would stop influencing you, because you could then make a conscious effort to squash them.
Example: if someone were molested by gerbils at a very young age, they might have violent impulses towards gerbils later in life but not know why. Once they realize that they are biased against gerbils, surely they would use that knowledge to contain their irrational and awkwardly murderous impulses when encountering gerbils as an adult. A few people might instead double (or triple, or quadruple) down on their gerbil hatred, fully embracing their bias rather than rejecting it. But those are usually the sociopaths- there's always going to be some.