I've always liked Annika and thought and have no problem with her playing in this tournament. One thing I do take exception to is people claiming she "earned" the right to be her. She did not. She got in on an exemption because BofA needed a promotional boost for what is generally considered the weakest ratings tournament on the tour. There is only one way to earn your way into a PGA event and that is qualifying for a spot via tournament rules. The exemptions are there to allow tournament sponsors and organizers the ability to beef up the field with fan favorites (or controversys) to boost ratings, and, occasionally throw a bone to a promising young kid, a local favorite or someones rich uncle.
If the same argument was made against all exemptions, ever, then I would probably be swayed by that argument. But exemptions have been around forever, and no one says boo about them.
The sponsor earned the right to those spots, by their financial support for the event. And part of their rights in this regard is the right to decide by what criteria someone would earn an invitation from them.
Bank of America decided she had earned an invitation from them. Based on the publicity she brought the event, and her class in handling the media circus, and her long record of achievement on the LPGA tour, I find it difficult to argue with their judgement that she earned the invitation.
I can see how others can say that in their opinion she hadn't earned the invitation.
But frankly, my opinion, yours, and theirs don't matter. The opinion of the sponsor, who earned the exemption, is the only one that mattered.