River City row: Here's one way to save BBC Scotland soap

The Herald Scotland

21-05-2025

There was much shock and disappointment when the announcement was made in March. A petition to save the soap was organised, a debate was held in the Scottish Parliament, and that was about it. Oh, and my description of the move as cultural vandalism was called 'somewhat hyberbolic' by a BBC heid yin. Apart from keeping an eye on the petition's progress, my work there was done, or so it seemed.
But no. On Tuesday, in a report by The Herald's arts correspondent Brian Ferguson, BBC Scotland accused Equity of punting misleading claims about River City viewing figures. The actors' union said half a million people watched each episode on average, but the figure is in fact 200,000.
The corporation was also reported to be upset at suggestions River City's £9 million budget would be 'funnelled into cheap reality or factual TV', and used to make new drama series that would import cast and crew from England.
A BBC spokesperson said: 'This is about value for money for the audience. We are not cutting our drama spend in Scotland – in fact, we will increase it to around £95m over the next three years.'
Now, at the risk of adding hyperbole to the mix again, may I just sidle into this latest twist to have a look around? Equity did indeed use the 500,000 figure, as did Scottish Labour's culture spokesman Neil Bibby when he led the Holyrood debate on River City. Equity has since corrected – or as it says 'updated' – the figure on its website to 200,000.
Read mor​e
The mistake was unfortunate, but in a strange way it might have done River City a favour. An audience of 200,000 an episode is still a pretty decent figure. Moreover, one assumes River City is cheaper to make.
Here is something else to consider. As a Herald reader pointed out on our letters page, if BBC Scotland had to find money for new programmes it could look instead at its current affairs shows. As he said, does anyone watch News at Seven and Debate Night?
So I asked BBC Scotland for the numbers and this was the reply: 'Since launch Reporting Scotland: News at Seven has a weekly reach of 80,000 and over the past 12 months Debate Night's weekly reach has been 121,000. Measuring news consumption by reach is a Barb standard and the definition of reach for news is watching for at least three minutes.'
In short, they reach fewer people than River City.
Now, you can argue, and the BBC does, that the audiences for news and drama are completely different, and comparing the two is not so much the stuff of apples and oranges as apples and trains. But I still think our reader had a point. If you can choose one drama over another, why not apply the same rule to current affairs? Keep the flagship, question the rest. It happened to The Nine after all.
The BBC says Reporting Scotland: News at Seven has a weekly reach of 80,000 (Image: free)
The row over River City was never just about numbers, though. Much more is going on here. There is unfairness, for a start. River City was hammered by the decision to show blocks of episodes with long gaps between. Fans of the soap, many of them elderly, could not keep up. One week Bob and Angus were there, doing their odd couple thing, the next they had slipped into some Bermuda triangle near Shieldinch. Can you imagine if that happened with Coronation Street or EastEnders?
River City is important in other ways. As actor-writer Tom Urie told BBC Scotland's Scotcast: 'It feels like part of Scotland's story.' He's right. Like any long-running drama, River City has had its good weeks and bad, stories that worked and some that didn't. But like the country it came from, River City kept on going. It has tackled difficult subjects, most recently domestic violence, and helped more than a few people along the way. So no, it's not just about gangsters, though I'll admit there has been too much of that.
Where River City has been truly invaluable is in bringing working-class voices on to our screens. They've been present in other soaps, but usually the character is there for comedy value, or to play a gangster. It is rare to have so many authentically working-class voices in a drama, far less attach them to ordinary, everyday characters, but River City does that.
Read more
Working-class voices are not heard nearly enough on television (and radio) and it matters that they are. As the saying has it, if you can see it, you can be it. What goes for actors goes for writers, directors, camera operators, sound technicians, and every other job you can think of on a set. If there's no River City there's no way into these professions for a lot of very bright youngsters from less than privileged backgrounds.
With dramas taking years to get from page to screen, commissioning editors need to think ahead, anticipate the next big thing. I get that, and I understand why BBC Scotland is backing the new trio of dramas by Scottish writers. Short series are in demand, particularly after the success of Adolescence, but fashions change. What is never going to be out of favour is authenticity, particularly now AI is knocking on the door, and River City opens the door to more of that.
For authenticity, for the training opportunities it offers, for laughs and tears, for just being there and giving enjoyment to so many, River City matters. And as every soap actor knows, once you get in that cab and leave, it is near impossible to come back. Please, BBC Scotland, think again.
Alison Rowat is a senior politics and features writer on The Herald. Contact [e-mail]