Over at that FB group that my old teacher started they are currently decrying the use of "due to" instead of "because of". I have never seen the point of this particular bit of nit-picking though I know it's a view that's commonly held by the prescriptivist lobby. I'd say that most people use the terms interchangeably.
Opinions?

Hmmm, they don't sound interchangeable to me. One is caused from (due to) and the other is a result of something. But I may be all wet. I'd like to see a few sentences.

They are objecting to "Who could of thought our Christmas carols on the Town square could have been cancelled once again due to covid"


There are plenty of things wrong with that sentence ("could of" for a start) but "due to" isn't one of them. (In my opinion.)

Incidentally how, in your view, does being "caused from (or by)" differ from "as a result of"?

The bus service is cancelled to the bad weather.
The bus service is cancelled because of the bad weather.