Balancing to take sides

Even brave men respect life's limitations. One cannot afford to loose value regarding a decision that forces someone to choose sides.
Am saying this because as a journalist, we are the eye of the society and we ought to do journalistic endeavours in an objective way. We are supposed to be neutraL,not take sides.
But alas! We should achieve "balance", "objectivity", and "neutrality" when at the same time morality dictates that we ought to exercise empathy, sympathy and honesty??
Moral character defines a person but in journalism, intelligence defines a journalist.
When a riot occurs and innocent people die or suffer at the hands of another man's decision, how do we as journalists report?? We report in a manner that clearly shows we take sides, how? We instill pity for those who are suffering while at the same time instill rage towards those who are the masterminds and underdog causes of the violence.
Whatever the case, we do take sides although we report in a balanced way. i.e we give each side a fair platform to be heard but at the end there is always a side that the story or investigation lean towards.
In another case, I witnessed a person being burnt alive in the slum of Kibera after stealing a cheap phone, when journalists arrrived moments later to capture the ordeal, did they report anything beyond the boaders of the actual burning??
But when a minister or politician is caught in a scandal either sexual or corruption deals, do we not report beyond the boundaries of the scandal in concession with various running stories time and time again?? If we do not take sides, why do we report in a biased manner, taking prominence as a consideration yet human life is equal.
Why is it that when people scream in hunger around the numerous slums of Kenya, the media takes a numb look at the situation and gives a few seconds of airtime to the wailing mouths compared to a minister who visits the same slums time and again giving empty petty promises all over in different versions of stories??
Well, scholars will say that its about prominence as a jouranlistic news element, but an intelligent human being ponders on what grounds does the life of another man befit
the misery of a destitute with a slim future. So tell me, dont we take sides??