So ... I gave you some specific examples that reveal that Fox does not simply distort news reporting, but actually promotes some very blatent disinformation (Trump won the 2020 election but it was stolen for example)... and your response is to simply wave your hands and declare "No actual evidence" ...

(Sigh!)

Regarding some of the observations you made, I have deep concerns ...

Observation 1 : "actual facts will tell you that COVID has been overblown"

This is literally Fox news fiction, you are claiming that you agree with them. The 1 million dead US citizens and many of their grieving relatives beg to differ. Beyond the deaths, there are literally many more millions of US citizens now living with Long COVID.

It was this line of thinking within the Trump administration that led to them completely botching the early response and so it resulted in a far greater degree of impact. Fox fell very much in line with that.

Observation 2 "the vaccines didn't really work either (overwhelming numbers of vaccinated people around the world keep catching COVID and reliving all the symptoms, including myself)"

I don't think you understand how vaccines actually work. This is also a play taken almost directly from Fox News disinformation. Vaccines are not a force field that bounce the virus off you, they give you an immune response to the virus so that you don't end up in hospital.

Observation 3 "Should we have simply shut the world down like we did"

Fox news: nope ... You: nope ... epidemiologists: yes, especially when there were no vaccines. We now do have the vaccine and that is why living with it becomes viable.

Observation 4 : "global warming science started flauntering"

This is literally yet another common Fox News talking point and is pure fiction. Yes, the tabloid end of the media has always been guilty of promoting sensational claims that had no basis in science. Meanwhile, the actual climate models, while they do have uncertainties, have successfully reproduced the past and made predictions that have been subsequently confirmed by actual observations.

I'm going to try and wrap this up.

Generic things we do agree on ...

- It's complicated

- There is nuance to many things

- Critical thinking matters

- Consuming information uncritically is not wise

Generic things we don't agree on ...

- Fox is no worse than other media sources, they are all equally bad

The observation that you appear to actually agree with some of their positions that are not factual perhaps explains why you don't see it.

I've made peace with the fact that we don't agree on this, and probably never will.

However, there is perhaps one further observation, one that we both might have consensus on - News that is commercial has a very distinct conflict of interest. If a major stream of funding is via advertising, then that drives a commercial need to keep viewers engaged and enraged. This pressure perhaps creates a degree of spin to keep viewers coming back for more. I was writing about this recently - https://medium.com/science-and-critical-thinking/can-we-fix-the-current-mess-public-media-vs-commercial-media-35c703a2c29b

At this point I'm drawing a line under our dialog and moving on. Yes, we are breaking up.