The concept of "objective" reporting by itself seems foreign. It's difficult to report on a situation when you have an agenda of your own, be it sponsors or personal bias. Moreover, how would one achieve "balanced perspective" in, for instance, interviewing about an incident? Two people reporting on a drunk driving incident will likely be against the person who was committing the crime, and not interested in presenting the opposite side of the story.
I like that the general media is completely biased; then you know what their agenda is. I can say that THIS news network will favor THIS side of politics. Meanwhile, watch the opposing network and find something in the middle that seems reasonable.
In the long run, it would be nice to see studios producing 100% factual content without excluding information about the opposing story. It would be nice if they would leave the ultra extremists to themselves and interview people who play devil's advocate. It would be nice, but not critical.
To sum it up, "objectivity" and "balanced perspective" are irrelevant as long as the person consuming the content is willing and able to do their own research. For the general public that does not have the interest in researching the topic further, well... I'm not sure about them!