Poll: Did 'Times' Cross the Line on Palin Family?

I've just been arguing for the past half-hour with a colleague over today's article in The New York Times about the hockey culture in Wasilla, Alaska. The story appears to be little more than an excuse to turn the spotlight on two bit players in the Sarah Palin saga: Her son, Track, and her daughter's baby daddy and husband-to-be, Levi Johnston.

Among the revelations: Track Palin was a top prospect who hurt his chances at going pro by getting into fights. ("On the ice, he was an animal.") Johnston was a somewhat lesser player whose father pressured him to be a star. Johnston and Bristol Palin may have tried to keep their relationship a secret. Hockey is an expensive (read: elitist) sport to play. Hockey players like to party.

Does the Times belong in the penalty box? My colleague, who works at another New York paper, thinks it does, calling the story an "inexcusable" example of "blatant bias" akin to the paper's insinuation-filled report on John McCain's "ethics." For my part, I'm not sure how much of this Times readers needed to know, but I'm also not sure any of it was clearly out of bounds. Palin and Johnston are both adults. High school athletes are a fixture of coverage in every local paper in America. And there's no question readers are desperate for every scrap of information on Sarah Palin. Should we blame her for her son's bad sportsmanship? I would say no. But does that mean the Times's editors are under obligation to withhold what they consider an interesting bit of detail? Again, I'd say no. When in doubt, newspapers should err on the side of disclosing what they know.

But maybe I'm wrong? I told my colleague I'd put it to a vote, so now it's your turn:

-----
Disclosure: I recently wrote a freelance article for the Times.

• Senate Panel Okays Controversial Copyright Bill
• Video games as a teaching tool at Harvard
• How a Drama Queen Is Transforming Cable TV