I don’t claim that they don’t, everyone has a bias.

The difference is, with journalists actual humans observe a situation, builds an understanding, creates a presentation where picks or produces material to convey that to people who cannot observe it first hand.

The accuracy and the fairness of the presentation they create defines their careers as journalists. Sometimes they build a reputation to be co complete hacks but the history is full of high quality reporting. The bias isn’t that big of an issue because there are multiple journalists who operate. Their censorship happens on editorial level but there are(or used to be) also high quality editors that don’t dilute the reality too much.

With algorithms, everything is systematically optimized for some irrelevant to the truth metrics without any understanding of the context. It’s also censored on massive scale, you can’t really use another source to see a different perspective.

I've never understood the point of this claim that "journalists are biased!".

All human beings are biased, and the systems we build inherit our biases. What is the alternative?