The MSM continues to trash the Huffington Post’s Nico Pitney for asking President Obama a so-called “staged” question from an Iranian. (Note: it wasn’t staged.)

The Washington Post’s spectacular blowhard Dana Milbank made a fuss over the question yesterday in his typical pompous fashion, once again confusing fancy verbiage with accurate reporting.

The New York Times’ Kate Phillps jumped in on the action today:

The problem is not just that Mr. Pitney, for just one day, was afforded a cherished seat in the room or given an airing for his question. And no one is diminishing his work that has drawn accolades for his devoted attention to an issue. Rather, the criticism is that he was cherry-picked, with a call-upon hours and hours beforehand, and handed a status that no one among the so-called elite of the press corps receives on any given day.

While that may indeed be a thorn in the feet of the corps who toil daily, the perception of a favored one who got exceptionally advance notice may send signals — far and wide — as to what lengths the administration will go to stage and control the message the president wants to send.

That is what has gotten lost in all the old vs. new media antagonisms. It’s not about Mr. Pitney’s work or for that matter, the question he asked. It’s about how the administration finagled the position in which he became an actor for the president’s agenda.

I can kind of see what she’s getting out, but this just sounds like kvetching.

I can’t help but wonder, is this the newspaper industry’s retaliation for Huffington Post wrecking the former’s business model?