If 62 percent of Arabs in Israel back the state's national service program, why does a New York Times story on the subject devote 82 percent of quoted words by Arabs to opponents of the program? The newspaper is forcing stories through its preferred frame. 
The New York Times holds its own skewed view of the Palestinian-Israeli conflict, according to which Israel is always to blame. It tries to impose this perspective on its readers by carefully choosing which facts to present and which to conceal. 
Recent press attention has focused on the repatriation of illegal African migrants from Israel. Very little of it has explained the context and difficult challenges facing Israel as a result of large-scale illegal immigration, particularly by non-Jews. None has included mention of Israel's history of welcoming refugees from around the globe. 
The claim that Israel has 35 laws that discriminate against Arab citizens is a transparently false canard meant to delegitimize the Jewish state. But that did not prevent the New York Times from publishing it, in violation of codes of ethics requiring accuracy even in the opinion pages. 
The Times publishes a puff piece that ignores the insidious truth about the smuggling tunnels between Egypt and the Gaza Strip. Worse still, the story is yet another example of the editors' penchant for humanizing Palestinian Arabs while demonizing Israelis. 
The Washington Post reported an Ha'aretz interview with the Israeli military's chief of staff, Lt. Gen. Benjamin Gantz, as front page news. But as The Atlantic's Jeffrey Goldberg pointed out, something important was missing in the re-transmission: Nuance that did not minimize the danger of Iranian nuclear weapons. 
What's the difference -- in news media coverage -- between Kashmir and the West Bank? It seems to be that, for the press, the former is "disputed" territory but the latter is "occupied." Yet sovereignty over the West Bank most definitely is unresolved and disputed. 
Mohammed Merah, the confessed Toulouse killer, said he wanted to avenge the deaths of Palestinian children. The drumbeat of false accusations that Israel murders Palestinian children is a modern day blood libel in which the media is complicit.
Jodi Rudoren’s recent friendly tweets to extreme anti-Israel activists were no aberration. More than 10 years ago she was already at it, failing to display the kind of journalistic objectivity that even a cub reporter should know was a basic requirement of her profession.