meh...you can build this straw man with others, sure. I've never claimed they don't matter or aren't evidence of anything or don't count etc. I have claimed it's completely lazy and unwise to create massive generalizations based on anecdotes. I've claimed it's completely lazy and unwise to attempt and make a policy argument one way or the other based on anecdotes. As you'll see in my original post I simply brought up evidence, and labeled it as such, that went against your claim. You can do with that what you want. Believe it, or don't. Doesn't matter to me and I'm not interested in attempting to change mind. I know that won't happen.
By "your buddies" I meant all those claiming that there are slivers of our MSM that are "better" or "worse" than others...Fox usually being at the top of the "yeah, they all suck, but I find this one to be the best of the worst" list. That couldn't be further from the truth and there is plenty of evidence to support that. However, I will say it's completely weird and bizarre for you to even attempt to make such a list/comment given that you don't watch it. When you make a claim like that, the logical assumption is you watch it enough to make judgment you do. Good to know it's just a random line in the sand you've created apparently. Thanks for clearing that up.