That touches on the observation of some school of thought in philosophy that I can't quite recall at this point (probably several, actually), which is essentially that reality is both fundamentally subjective and also objective, because in order for something to be observed, criticized, or presented to others, there must, necessarily, be an observer, a critic, or a presenter, both by definition and also in actual fact. There is no science without a scientist; there is no view without a viewer, so to speak.
In some sense, even if we choose what we would say is a neutral perspective, e.g. "chronological" or "topical" or something, we are, in some sense, taking the 4-D reality of some thing or object or idea and compressing it into a chosen narrative, which must, in order to be intelligible and achieve its purpose, flow according to certain patterns within our experience.
Or, to put it more simply, we're all sort of doomed towards different biases, if only because of our own imperfections and limitations of communication, shared knowledge, and understanding of how things work. Or something like that. Vagueness is the key to broad acceptance, lol.