The difference between Attenborough and Burns? Attenborough makes no attempt to hide his enthusiasm for his viewpoint. Burns is much more subtle in his approach. Attenborough, align with him or not is a treasure as a film maker and an unabashed salesman for his point of view. They are both consummate salesman and artists, presenting their view of the world and history. One minimizes his biases, the other, Attenborough, proclaims them loudly and proudly. He is on a mission. Burns, I think, less so. He picks subjects of personal interest, finds funding and then presents his vision. I don't think Burns is as invested in his subject matter as Attenborough. Burns stuff is a product of self-interest. Attenborough is on a quest!
To give Burns his due though, his presentation is first rate. One easily learns from both men. What a viewer learns may not agree with what the author/producer intended though. And, that is a very good thing. Both will, if you are serious, provoke a lot of critical thinking and internal debate if the viewer/reader is open to such.
To be fair, no author or producer is capable of stepping out of themselves totally. Plus what's the point of writing a book or producing a video if one cannot present their vision. The same applies to the owners of newspaper and editors.
Just keep striving for balance Jay, it's a never ending, sometimes tortuous endeavor.