When you analyze the operations, it is hard to find fault with the IDF. And that says a lot. They are widely considered to be the best in the world at limiting civilian casualties, and are probably the only ones willing to compromise the effectiveness of their operations to do so. And they have not deviated from their traditional practice as of yet.
Consider the AOR they have been tasked with operating in and the nature of their opponents.
Gaza City is the 40th most densely populated city on Earth. And the strip in general is near that rank for a geographic entity. Much of the population is housed in overpopulated and structurally unsound buildings.
Their opponents use civilians as human shields as a matter of doctrine, and routinely use hospitals, schools and mosques as fighting positions. You cannot shoot anything at them without putting dozens or hundreds of civilians in the line of fire.
We ("we" meaning just about everyone on Earth) accept that Israel has a right in international politics, and a duty to its people, to protect itself.
So when the Israeli government orders the IDF to bomb and then invade Gaza, you have to take Gaza itself into account.
In the 9 days it took the US to secure Baghdad in 2003, we killed at least 2300 civilians. And Baghdad is an easier environment to operate in and the US Army has more technological toys which are supposed to eliminate civilian casualties.
This isn't to say that Israel is totally in the right or that all of their strikes are based on good intelligence or always hit their intended target. However, taking into account the realities on the ground they are doing an extremely good job at limiting civilian casualties.
On the other hand, they are doing a ****-poor job at PR.