The Agonist is sponsoring a letter from "progressive bloggers," and encouraging phone calls, etc., to the National Press Club.
At issue: The NPC's upcoming panel discussion on "blogging" versus "journalism," which seems to really be more aimed at discussing the controversy over Jeff Gannon, the porn site operator who magically came into possession of a White House press pass that other "journalists" with similar qualificatins couldn't get.
The Agonist letter's point: If this thing is going to be about Gannon (who will be one of the panelists) rather than about "blogging v. journalism" per se, then one of the bloggers who exposed Gannon should be included as well.
Sounds fair to me. Presumably if the NPC held a panel discussion on "journalism and the Iraq war," they'd pick a military or government official who helped plan, or participated, in the war and a journalist who covered the war, rather than a military or government official who didn't help plan and/or participate in the war and/or a journalist who covers 4H meetings. The whole point of a panel is to bring together the diverse perspectives which are relevant, right?