But it is the viewpoint of journalists worldwide; journalists who have lost the respect of the vast majority of the public in nearly every corner of the globe. That is,a viewpoint that no narrative can ever be "unfair" because if they can write it, then as you say it is all narrative and they have the right to write whatever pleases them or their employer. The idea that a thinking person can't add an adjective before the noun "narrative" to modify it, characterize it, or describe it is beyond arrogant; it is intellectual dishonesty. Further it well describes the mindset of a fraud or a huckster.
A narrative is simply another word for a story; it describes an event or events and often times includes dialogue. Of course a story can be fair or unfair, true or false because there is truth and not-truth. A story can be accurate or inaccurate. It can present a conversation or circumstances taken out of their context and with a different context manufactured. If I write a narrative that says the Rams won the Superbowl by blowing out the Pats that narrative is false.
Of course, if journalists were actually intellectually honest and ethical, they'd admit that the majority of what they write is their opinion filtered by their worldview and little more. As often as not today, it is written to influence others to adopt that journalists conclusions.
The modern term for a false or inaccurate or unfair narrative as regards journalism is Fake News. Some narratives can rise to the level of slander and be actionable in a civil court of law. Fake News is more than a bumper sticker slogan; it well describes a modern era condition whereby a narrative presented by a person given the power of the pen, an audience and the protection of free speech to say nearly whatever they want to in order to achieve whatever their purpose might be can tell lies, make false accusations, and set out to destroy the character or even the achievements of others.
