I’ve written articles in this style. The goal is to be evocative of the story. Simple factual accounts carry less weight than the reader being present in the situation. To remain truthful and accurate you describe factually; it is not counter to that to also describe in a way that situates, evokes, humanizes something that is about the experience.

This is about two uncertain, trusting parents taking their young daughter for treatment. It is in every way one of the most frightening human experiences. In that light, this is a light, gentle touch by the author trying to communicate to you the reader the humanity behind the facts.

They're writing about a child that died, I don't think they hav any other motive other than the reader to feel sadness or outrage and given it is a dead child, they should not.

Indeed. Whilst not the same situation, one of the things I realized while developing a filtering system for various websites was to be thankful for obnoxious mannerisms and phrases. You want people to keep using filtered phrases and such because said users are usually not worth the time anyway, even if they stopped using them.

Did you describe what happened in a neutral tone?

Is writing in neutral tone describing situation in cold facts without evoking situation that generate emotions in the reader ?

I looked up what neutral tone is, and it seems to be more about how you write than what you write. https://pressbooks.ccconline.org/medianewsandreporting/chapt...

This feels weird to me. It's like a newspaper describing a mass-killing without interviewing survivors because they would have emotions.

And also, neutrality is a myth, especially in news reporting. What you can do is using unloaded language and be balanced between parties.But being neutral doesn't mean you don't have values. Preferring live over death, and justice/honesty over injustice/cruelty.