That’s a question for the journalists, by the way.
The Shields Gazette this evening asks us how well do we know our borough?
One of the questions posed in the article, next to a picture of the Roman Fort’s reconstructed West gate, was;
What is the Roman name for South Shields?
A. Caer Urfa
B. Segedunum
C. Pons Aelius
All of which are incorrect, of course. The Roman name for South Shields is Arbeia
Have I ever spoke about lazy journalists who do the research after the copy has been filed?
“All of which are incorrect, of course. The Roman name for South Shields is Arbeia”
WRONG!
The Roman name for South Shields is unknown.
Have I ever spoke about cocky bloggers who whine and moan about anything they can find fault with?
Comment by Hans Offmycrotch — August 21, 2007 @ 10:14 am
Thank you for the comment from Johnson Press North East.
Caer Urfa was the place name given to the settlement here by the Brigantes, a fiercely independent celtic tribe, you will find the Roman name Arbeia listed here, it is thought to be a Latinised form of a name originally from Aramaic - the native language of the last attested unit stationed at the fort - meaning ‘the Place of the Arabs’
Besides, if, as you suggest, the Roman name for South Shields is unknown, then surely it cannot have been right for The Shields Gazette to provide a “correct” answer to it’s own quiz!
Comment by curly — August 21, 2007 @ 11:12 am
There is a further nicely documented history of the town’s names from another former South Tyneside councillor - here.
Comment by curly — August 21, 2007 @ 11:15 am
Q: How well do you know the mechanics of your local newspaper, Curly?
A: Not very well it seems, but it’s easy to pounce on “lazy journalists” and blame the names you know for the (supposed) errors.
In defence of my friends and former colleagues you should know that everything written for the Gazette goes through AT LEAST another three people before it is printed. On top of that, not every word you read has been written by the person named in the byline.
You’re not a daft bloke, so I assume you know this already, but it’s patently obvious you need reminding that stories go through roughly this process: author > newsdesk > sub editor > proof reader. Often there are more people involved along the line, meaning that any mistakes (or not, as one of the previous comments to this blog post might suggest) may not be the responsibility of the journalist/author. To take an easy swipe at “lazy journalists” just because we’re easy targets for the uneducated is ignorant in both senses of the word - and I expected better from you.
On a side note, I’m interested in this line from you above - “Thank you for the comment from Johnson Press North East”. Does this mean you’re hinting at the identities of people who wish to remain anonymous in posting comments here? Perhaps from an email address which this software assures ‘will not be published’? If that’s the case then it doesn’t do much for your reputation and could also lead to disciplinary action for anyone who might have commented from JPNE (I don’t know if this is the case) who are told not to get involved in discussions of this nature. Very bad form from you if I’m right. In fact I think I might ask you in the Corner Shop forum where I, of course, will expect an honest answer.
Comment by Murray Kelso — August 21, 2007 @ 11:56 pm
Murray, you know that I wouldn’t dream of releasing the full identity revealed through the reverse DNS search of the IP address, besides the story carried no byline. As you rightly point out, more than one pair of eyes will have scrutinised the text before it was published, I guess this shows that a number of people don’t know South Shields as well as we might expect them to.
Perhaps my reaction was a hasty response to the “cocky” jibe which came in a little under the lowest rib. (Best not to pursue this line any further)
So I humbly offer a public apology to Hans Offmycrotch if I have caused an immersion in hot water.
Comment by curly — August 22, 2007 @ 12:46 am
ladies, please
Comment by S Wilson — August 23, 2007 @ 12:03 am
What about us Marsden lads? Where do we fit in to this debate?
Just because we have a more interesting beach and we didn’t allow the Romans to settle here doesn’t mean we should be excluded from this debate.
We do have a quay at Camels Iseland that is reputed to have been built by the Romans. We only allowed this to happen because we felt sorry for our Italian friends as the alternative was for them to go to a place called in Latin ”Doonus Toonus”.
Comment by neil maxwell — August 23, 2007 @ 1:00 am
curly just a few words for mr kelso,as you said everything goes through three different people, how is it that you all get so much wrong?
Comment by j taylor — August 23, 2007 @ 6:11 pm
With the wealth of information available on the internet it comes as a surprise to learn that they think the Romans named South Shields Caer Urfa rather than Arbeia. I understand that a fair amount of “research” is done by journalists on the internet, so how did they fail to find Arbeia?
We are all human and prone to mistakes to be fair.
Murray and I have put our differences to bed by the way.
Comment by curly — August 23, 2007 @ 7:12 pm