That the purpose of the media is not to accurately portray reality seems to be rather the point that Rosling is making. I fail to see any significant difference between your points and his, certainly not so much difference as to substantiate your claim that he is "dumb".

The point is not that we can know anything with absolute certainty, but that the media creates a more distorted perception of reality than we might otherwise obtain. If one relies upon the media for their impression of the world then they are more likely to have a more greatly distorted view than they might otherwise have. If one desires to have a relatively more reliable perception of things they have to work for it, which most people simply do not have an interest in doing. It is possible though - identify primary source material, fact check what one hears, network with people from different parts of the world, expose oneself to different ideologies and cultures; in short be critical and curious.

Speak for yourself. You fundamentally know nothing. It's called "willfully ignorant".

I would disagree. There are situations in which the facts simply aren't open for discussion because they are overwhelmingly, objectively pointing to one conclusion. Many societies in the West have adopted this bias towards neutrality; this view that every opinion is legitimate to some degree. That's why you find people who are categorically rejecting things such as Climate Change, or the oppression of women.

At some point, we need to point out that not every opinion is legitimate. Sometimes, they simply are wrong.