>In the worst case scenario, I'm reading an AP article which omits the author's name. WTF?

Would you also expect the sub-editor's name, both from AP/AAP or Reuters and from the publication which edited the wire story? The chief-of-staff probably assigned that story over the alternatives, which would have been biased (because she's human too) - so do you want her name? And don't forget the section editor, the primary editor, the publication's owner (or owners).

It's a nice suggestion in theory. In reality, having the author's name can be more misleading than having none at all, since it assumes they have more control than they really do.