Yeah man, it's just about ethics in game journalism.
Except if you read about what actually happened... (A hard concept for someone trapped in tribal politics, but hear me out.)
The GamerGaters got permission to have a panel in response to all this talk about them supposedly being some sort of cross between Hitler and the Comic Book Guy from the Simpsons. So right there, that wrecks this "GamerGate harassed the panel into oblivion" -- why would GamerGate harass a convention right after fighting for the right to speak at it?
Also, You'll note that's what's always missing in these discussions -- anything from the POV of the "other side." We're just supposed to accept as fact that GamerGate are evil right wing MRAs that are dedicated to harassing innocent women online and keeping gaming "pure."
We're definitely not supposed to ask for evidence of this supposed harassment or actually ask the GamerGaters what their take on all this is or ask any of the dozens of POC or Women in GamerGate for their view on things (or even acknowledge they exist).
Nope, some con artists pretending to be victimized feminists like Zoe Quinn or Anita Sarkeesian said GamerGate is bad and by god, our entire critical thinking processes shut down the second that happens -- to the point that they're requesting that the UN force the US to censor the entire internet to prevent people from making fun of them when they say or do something stupid.
Listen and Believe.
In reality we've seen this happen at multiple GamerGate meetups, including the one the Society of Professional Journalists was putting on -- if GamerGate is being allowed to speak, these psychotic faux social justice sociopaths call in bomb threats, harass the venue, try to blackmail people into silencing them, et cetera. The one thing that can get one of these lazy entitled pink haired twits to actually get off of Twitter and Tumblr and DO something is seeing GamerGate possibly be allowed to speak someplace.
So here's the question that you should be asking if you still have your critical reasoning skills: Why?
If GamerGate is some sort of reactionary far right hate mob then why not let them speak and prove that they're some kind of group of monsters? Why call in up to 10 bomb threats at a single venue just to silence them? Is the mere fact that some supposed trollish conservative neckbeard dudebros speaking THAT dangerous to society at large? These Social Justice troll types don't go around threatening the Westboro guys with bomb threats, or try to get the GOP convention shut down for "regressive anti-trans opinions," so it's obviously not about Social Justice.
Could it possibly be that the reason they don't want GamerGate to speak is that the bullshit story they keep feeding people -- that GamerGate is supposedly a group of white male nerds who hate women -- has absolutely nothing to do with reality? That there's an incredible amount of money to be made in being a professional victim (read: con artist) but that relies on you making absolutely certain the boogieman you have helped create remains some sort of amorphous source of dread and is never, ever allowed to defend themselves?