Only I called it a media watchdog association. No one else. However, their ultimate point is that some stories don't get the air time they likely deserve. And it's not a new-fangled organization. It's sponsored by a California State university (Sonoma State) and has been going on since the mid-90s.

And it's not like these stories are illegitimate. It's not necessarily that the editorials (which many of the articles are, admittedly) are 100% correct, but they are based on verifiable fact, regardless of the conclusions, and seem to have been utterly ignored by the mainstream press. These articles are regularly featured in such publications as Utne Reader, et al., for example, not to mention European news sources, so it's not that it's just some random wacko (unless you want to claim that all Utne articles are by wackos, which I suppose some of you might).

Also, if you look back in their archives, which unfortunately go back only to 2000 right now, you'll see that they were hard on the Clinton administration as well, also mostly in regard to foreign policy. It's not that they're picking on Bush unnecessarily, but those are the big stories, and the ones that get reported on at all. (It's unlikely that a European news organization is going to report on state or local issues, after all.) And it's hard to even see the stories that go missing altogether. For example, my local newspaper (before they were bought out by a conglomerate) won the Pulitzer Prize for Public Service in reporting the environmental impact of over-hog-farming. What if it had been taken over a year earlier and the new owners were particularly pro-hog-farming? Those stories might not have made it to press at all.