I disagree that factual information upsets people. What upsets people is the editorializing of the facts and also the subjective decisions of producers to highlight some facts while dismissing others.

If I said Hillary Clinton was being investigated for using an unauthorized personal server in her home to send and receive classified information, that would be a fact.

If I editorialized that fact by saying it is evidence of her inherent poor judgement and lack of fitness to be President, that would be potentially offensive and not news worthy. That should be left up to the consumer.

Additionally, if I produce the news for a media outlet and I choose to air only factual information that shows Hillary Clinton in a negative light and choose to omit factual stories that show her in a positive light, it is not the individual facts that are upsetting. It is the disingenuous selectivity of facts packaged as objectivity that is upsetting, because it's not reasonably consistent with the idea of truth.

The goal of producers should not be to tell a story or make a difference, but to do their best job at transmitting facts in an objective way and letting viewers come to their own conclusions. Regardless of what those conclusions are.

Objectivity is not just about the adjectives used to describe fact, but a critical assessment of why certain facts are promoted while others are ignored.