I love the New York Times. (And btw…I hope their paywall is wildly successful so they can actually get paid for their enterprising work, which still sets the standard for American journalism.) Other than the Wall Street Journal, there really are no dailies left that are consistently doing quality, reliable journalism.

But like anything you love, you have differences. So I was upset to see the newspaper of record recently put on its cover a large photo of Israeli soldiers removing Palestinians from a West Bank neighborhood to make room for a Jewish settlement. Personally, I’m against Israel expanding its territorial hold on the West Bank, and the photo or the news of the event was not unwarranted.

But it’s all about context and balance, isn’t it?

What bothers me is that when Judge Richard Goldstone of the now infamous U.N. Goldstone Report recently dropped a bomb (sorry bad choice of words), making a huge about face and saying that Israel purposely did not target Palestinian civilians in Gaza, the huge story was buried inside the paper.

Then one of Hamas’s many rockets launched an Israel hit a school bus; that gained but a tiny reference. I realize that Israel is seen as the aggressor by a media that loves to assign someone the underdog role, which for most is the Palestinians. And certainly part of that is due to the Palestinians’ ability to feed the surface simplicity the media loves.

Still, I feel like a football player getting caught throwing the last punch after repeatedly getting kicked in the groin without the referee seeing it.

How does everyone else see this?