Every year sportswriter Matthew Berry opens his season discussing fantasy football with some variation of this essay, showing you can "prove" whatever you want by highlighting some information over other information. Read the opening section above the first photograph, especially the sections about Quarterback A and Quarterback B, even if you don't care for football or fantasy football.
Now reflect that what you can do with football statistics you can do with sociology, or psychology, or anthropology, or education, criminology. You can do it even more with history, and can do it so easily with journalism that you should hold the information they present to you at arm's length even if you trust them. Even if it's your twin sister, who is nicer than you. Even if it's your own self, writing a decade ago.
Journalists will emphatically agree with you on this, and historians will be right behind them, saying "Yes, this is what we have been telling you all along! It matters which voices get to speak and which don't! It matters whether you look at things from the POV of the powerful or the powerless! There are dozens of different perspectives that are possible and the writer must choose carefully and declare his or her choices and reasons. And the reader should be aware that choices have been made and be cautious about what they are seeing." They do get that. They do honestly understand that.
And then they go and are still worse than everyone else in terms of bias. Mere cynicism, mere knowing-that-it-happens, is not an adequate defense. I don't know the reason for this, but I suspect it stems from being a certain sort of person, who wants to tell everyone what is really happening. It may be that this personality characteristic overwhelms all sincere effort to be objective.
And, pretty obviously, I have that personality characteristic myself.