It was the best of the Times. It was the worst of the Times.

This past Sunday, Los Angeles’ largest daily newspaper published an extremely compelling and equally timely article about a city’s Jewish population as it welcomed the new year. The story was framed in the context of a historic and debilitating crisis. The writer combined an overview of the broader policy ramifications of the catastrophe together with poignant personal stories of perseverance, optimism and generosity. It was an ideal way for a secular media outlet to both recognize the importance of our High Holy Days while explaining that in many ways our community’s obstacles and opportunities are extremely similar to those of our friends and neighbors.

The city on which this article was written was not Los Angeles, but rather Kharkiv, a Ukrainian municipality not far from that country’s border with Russia. Times reporter Laura King helped us understand how Jewish families there have navigated such unimaginable upheaval in their lives: she told inspiring stories how Kharkiv’s Jews have survived in the face of such terror and their support for other Ukrainians in overcoming their own challenges.

A few days earlier, The Times had posted another article about a city’s – this city’s – Jewish community as we prepared for Rosh Hashanah. The headline alluding to the “tough times” that LA Jews are facing: In service of that premise, the writer could have focused on the rising spread of antisemitism or perhaps how increasing rates of intermarriage, secularization, and non-affiliated Judaism were affecting the community. The Times might have taken a look at the challenges that Jewish and other pro-Israel students are facing on their college campuses, or possibly the efforts that Jews and other underrepresented communities are making to form and strengthen multi-faith and multi-ethnic coalitions. An ambitious reporter might have used the High Holy Days as an opportunity to explore the generational divisions among American Jews relating to our homeland and our faith, or how our commemoration of Jewish history might change as so many Holocaust survivors pass away.

Any one of these conversations could have been an impactful and evocative discussion of both commonalities that Jews and other ethnic and religious groups face, along with the uniqueness of the Jewish community and its approach to these challenges. Instead, what we got was yet another “Jews in Hollywood” story — albeit one that focused on Jews who are striking against the entertainment industry as opposed to running it. 

To The Times’ credit, the reporter did take the time to refute the “trope” of Jewish control of Hollywood. But then the rest of the article turned to an extensive assessment of the cost of belonging to a synagogue or purchasing tickets for High Holy Day services. Which, in effect, replaced the antisemitic slur of wealthy Jews running Hollywood with one of wealthy Jews preventing their less-advantaged counterparts from worshiping.  It’s difficult to argue that this represents a great deal of progress.

To be clear, I have great sympathy for the writers and actors who are facing such economic and professional uncertainty. We have friends and family whose livelihoods depend on a successful resolution of the current stalemate and I am hoping for a fast and just outcome. But it’s unclear why The Times, which has told the story of the striking workers effectively and consistently throughout the last several months, chose to cut-and-paste their standard strike coverage on top of an article regarding a religious community’s observance of our holiest days.

Reporting, explaining and making sense of the extraordinary mixture of cultures, ethnicities and religions that comprise America in the 21st century is a daunting task. When they set their mind to it, The Times can still rise to the occasion. Their new polling project examining the attitudes of the nation’s immigrants also premiered on Sunday. It clearly required a tremendous amount of resources and an admirable commitment to helping its readers understand a complicated and important topic in an incisive and nuanced way. Which makes their cavalier and backhanded treatment of the Jewish community here so much more disappointing.

Dan Schnur is the U.S. Politics Editor for the Jewish Journal. He teaches courses in politics, communications, and leadership at UC Berkeley, USC and Pepperdine. He hosts the monthly webinar “The Dan Schnur Political Report” for the Los Angeles World Affairs Council & Town Hall. Follow Dan’s work at www.danschnurpolitics.com