ABSTRACT
The claims of journalistic belonging made by emerging digital media actors and embedded in their work have challenged the way people think about journalism. Adversarialism in a journalistic identity is not new. Tensions are not only between Greenwald's and the establishment's vision; there are greater vested interests that also contribute to such disagreements over whether or not such interlopers fit the field. Where a common narrative around blogging at the turn of the century was their dependence on traditional media for content that they then commented on, here bloggers led and in what is considered by some a vindication of the form, traditional media then had to play catch-up when covering a story. Considering interlopers' visions of the field from the periphery, and their often-critical remarks towards journalism in the core, reactions from that core seem expected. However, this is in contrast to the approaches journalists have taken when new ways of information reaching publics seem advantageous.
