What a great question! Thank you for asking it.
I think Sean’s definitions are quite helpful:
subjective: based on or influenced by personal feelings, tastes, or opinions
objective: not influenced by personal feelings or opinions in considering and representing facts
Consider, then, the statement, “Carson likes chocolate ice cream.” This is subjectively true. But, therefore, it is also objectively true! That statement is a factual description of my preferences.
What about, “Carson worships Jesus as Lord.” Again, that is both subjectively and objectively true. That is an accurate description of what I do - observed from both an internal and external point of view.
One step further - how would you evaluate the statement, “Jesus is Lord”? If you think Christianity is true, this is an objectively true statement. If you think Christianity is false, then it could only be the kind of statement which someone personally feels is true - but they are wrong.
So when you listen to Ravi, for instance, share his personal story of encountering Christ, some will see this as the retelling of a merely personal story; others will hear it as not only a personal story but also as an accurate description of the God who is there.
For this reason, I don’t think Dr. Tyson will convince anyone who doesn’t already agree with him. It is the equivalent of a Christian saying, “Atheism is a personal truth, but it isn’t objectively true.” I don’t think that kind of argument is going to convert Richard Dawkins! It just isn’t the kind of argument that is very interesting. However, having these labels can help us better describe our understanding of how we see reality.