My experience of Radio DIVA

On Tuesday, I travelled down to London to the studio of Radio DIVA. I’d been invited to take part in a discussion about lesbian and bi representation on television, specifically on soaps and other long-running shows. Inevitably, Berena was also on the agenda – so many of us are still talking about the denouement of the storyline and the BBC’s handling of audience complaints, and one of the show’s regular hosts is the actor Heather Peace (Holby City, Lip Service). Also on the panel were Barbara Machin, a television writer and showrunner (Casualty, The Bill), and Fizz Milton, head of the DIVA media group and former BBC producer (Different for Girls). The writer and producer Jacquie Lawrence (Different for Girls) was also in the studio, but having invited Fizz to participate, she took a backseat. On the telephone was the actor Alicya Eyo (Bad Girls, Emmerdale).   

The point was to bring together various different perspectives – actors, producers, a writer, and me, a viewer/fan with a spot of relevant academic expertise – from within a community that we all agree is desperate for on-screen representation. I realised on arrival that we were without exception middle-class, able-bodied women who identified as lesbians (as far as I know), and most of us were white, so there are, no doubt, experiences and nuances that collectively we didn’t capture; my hope was always that this was a starting point for conversations across these positions in relation to making and watching television, and I think we should ensure that further conversations take place among more diverse groups.  

I wanted to blog about this while it was still kind of fresh, because when I opened Twitter after leaving the studio and beginning my journey back up north, I realised that lots of the people listening had experienced the discussion differently to me, and in ways that I think it’s really important to address.

People were tweeting Radio DIVA to complain that I was being interrupted a lot, and I had a number of messages along the lines of, “you tried, I’m sorry they weren’t listening, thanks anyway”. It hadn’t felt like that to me, and I worried that I’d done a bad job of putting my views across. Perhaps I did.

I knew that I would be alone in putting forward the fan/viewer perspective while everyone else was speaking from some sort of ‘insider’ perspective, and whilst I’d been assured that it wasn’t going to be a them-against-me pummelling, I also didn’t expect anyone to radically alter their position. What I did hope for was receptiveness to the things I was saying, and some recognition that this wasn’t simply a case of ungrateful fans making an unnecessary racket, and I left feeling that was what had happened.   

Was I deluding myself? Had I been so pleased to be there that I’d forgotten what was important? I was happy to be there because, as I’ve said all along, the only way forward from here is for the barriers between viewers and creators to come down, but, without wishing to offend anyone, I don’t think I was star-struck or awed by the occasion. In all honesty, hobbling down to London on crutches via public transport, I was tired and sore by the time I arrived.

Part of the issue is that audio is an incomplete record of a conversation. When I listened back to the discussion I realised that I was interrupted quite frequently, especially in the earlier parts of the show – but sitting face-to-face with Heather and the rest of the panel on Tuesday, I could see when someone reacted to what I was saying. I knew when someone was gearing up to respond, so their interjection was not, to me, as abrupt as it probably sounded to those listening. And those listening could not have seen the nodding of heads, the smiles and tears as the panel reacted to what I told them about the impact of Berena, positive and negative.

I thought the on-air conversation was respectful, even if we weren’t always persuaded by one another’s arguments. It’s also worth pointing out that off-air – before the show started, while music was being played, and as we were packing up to leave – there was no tension or animosity. Rosie had read a number of my blog posts and talked with Fizz about the impact of foilers. Barbara reiterated her offer to allow me to visit the writers’ room at Casualty and be part of the conversation. I spoke to Heather during each record, and she wasn’t at all dismissive, despite our perspectives probably being the most obviously ‘opposed’.

In fact, though some things were put to me that I wholeheartedly reject, I think we all agreed on a number of things. An hour-long radio show, however, couldn’t really cover the complexities of the broader topic of wlw representation, let alone the experience of Berena fans since the December episodes aired. I wish I had been better able to articulate and insist on the role that the BBC’s promotion of Berena played in the way that fans felt. There was much that we didn’t have time to cover in detail, or that we couldn’t all respond to.

It’s also worth mentioning the limitations of discussion via a public forum – as people with a working relationship with the BBC (even if that’s historical), I wonder if some of the panel might not have been able to express their opinions as they would do in private. The BBC is notoriously fragile in the face of criticism. Discussion in public is vital if we want to keep chipping away at the barriers between creators and viewers, but there are also, perhaps, conversations that need to take place in private.

I want to write more about all of this – in particular the value of longevity as it’s perceived by people involved in making television and those who watch it – but as usual, it’ll take me a while, and I really wanted to address the discussion itself before too long had passed. I’d be interested to know what people think (you can comment below).