That's not "full transparency", it's time-wasting.
And no, I'm not assuming that everyone can interpret and understand everything, pretty much the opposite. If you filled every article with listing outliers to every general trend you mentioned, it would end up so cluttered with pointless anecdotes that it would just confuse the average reader and they'd have no idea how to interpret it.
"Nationally, homicide is down 15% this year.....but it's up 20% in Memphis."
To an educated person, the second half of that statement adds absolutely nothing to the first half, it's pointless unless you specifically care about Memphis for some reason. But to an uneducated person, the two halves of the statement basically cancel each other out. They don't realize that the Memphis #'s are already factored into the national #'s, and the national stats have SO much more data involved than the Memphis stats that they drown it out for any meaningful analysis. Instead, to their ears it basically just becomes, "Well, it's up some places and down some places", and thus they've understood nothing.