Newsbusters is the online destination for conservative anxious for more (hourly) proof that the press has a liberal bias. On Monday, the theme was the press was too nice during the announcement of Hillary Clinton as SoS. (“No Raining on Obama's Parade, As Nets Fail to Remember Attacks on Hillary”) And in general it's been that the press has been too nice to the Obama post-election. (“Walters Put Bush on Defense in 2001, But Tosses Softballs to Obama.”)

You get the idea. Newsbusters posts a headline about a supposed press calamity and then explains what horrible newsroom crime against the GOP (or humanity) has been committed by the America's ocean of biased reporters.

But the item headlined “CBS Offers Tribute to Harvey Milk: 'A Rebel With A Cause'” caught our attention because Newsbusters never got around to complaining about anything in the CBS report. There was nothing factually wrong, at least not accoridng to Newsbusters. And there were no allegations of bias. Newsbusters didn't claim any relevent information had been left out of the CBS report.

Was the the only reason Newsbusters posted the item because Newsbusters was irked that CBS devoted time to a movie about a (liberal) gay guy. And if so, does that really qualify as media criticism?

P.S. We wouldn't want to be in the Newsbusters office the day this year's Academy Awards nominations are announced.