Liberals tend to have difficulty distinguishing fact from persuasive rhetoric; A belief or argument that xx will do/produce "zz" can be either a true FACT * or simply an opinion,best guess, a belief based on nothing more than the idea that others embrace the belief too.
Conservatives tend to be more analytical. They tend to be persuaded by fact based arguments that cite credible/historical sources that have been independently verified. In short they understand that a theory, idea, proposal is and IDEA. The validity of the idea must be researched before embracing as a "great solution/ fix/way to control....."
Another difficulty and difference is how the two define a fact based on what exists or what theory they have embraced.
--> Fox News clearly has its headline news segments and its opinion/discussion shows segments. Their format is based on the concept that individuals need to hear /be presented with various proposals/theories/ explanations from various sources. The individual view can then seek more info or verify what guests/pundits have said. Many liberals chose to embrace what they perceive is the most popular mantra of their associates /friends. The end result is often no actual individual analysis as it requires less effort and disagreement may produce anger, irritation or insults from their friends. It's far easier to chime in /scoff at whatever-esp if you really have no other info gleaned from your own investigation of other sources.