BBC apologises after staff felt ‘unable to raise’ Russell Brand complaints

A BBC review into the conduct of Russell Brand during his time with the broadcaster has found a number of people “felt unable to raise” concerns about the presenter and believed he “would always get his way and therefore they stayed silent”.

The review was carried out by Peter Johnston, BBC director of editorial complaints and reviews, and focused on Brand’s behaviour on BBC 6 Music and BBC Radio 2 between 2006 and 2008.

The actor and comedian, 49, has denied accusations of rape, assault and emotional abuse, and previously said all his sexual relationships were “absolutely always consensual”.

On his Thursday online show, hosted on the video platform Rumble in the afternoons, Brand said he was “falsely accused of sex crimes”, while talking about other news.

In September 2023, a joint investigation by The Sunday Times, The Times and Channel 4 Dispatches revealed four women had accused him of sexual assaults between 2006 and 2013.

The review, which cost £662,060, looked at reports Brand urinated “into cups or bottles while in the studio, throwing objects, allegations of sex on the premises including with competition winners, and exposure while in the studio in front of staff and guests”, and on-air comments.

It also investigated management “failings”, including his relationship with the then-controller of Radio 2 Lesley Douglas, who resigned over a prank call Brand made to Fawlty Towers actor Andrew Sachs.

Culture Secretary Lisa Nandy said the allegations, along with staff feeling unable to raise concerns, are “horrendous”, and called on the BBC to “reassure its staff and the wider public that it takes these issues seriously”.

A Downing Street spokesman said she “will be seeking assurances from the BBC that they have robust processes in place regarding non-editorial complaints”.

Philippa Childs, the head of broadcasting union Bectu, said the report was “deeply troubling” and called them “symptomatic of an industry-wide problem”.

Mr Johnston investigated eight complaints about Brand, saying only one was formally made to the BBC.

He said: “I am grateful to those who have come forward to talk to me and my team and I have apologised on behalf of the BBC to those most directly affected by what I have documented here.

“The culture of the time undoubtedly influenced what was acceptable/tolerated, but I have found that a number of individuals had concerns about Russell Brand’s behaviour which they felt unable to raise then.

“Many interviewees believed, rightly or wrongly, that Russell Brand would always get his way and therefore they stayed silent (and I note here my finding above that the one complaint that was made in 2007 was not dealt with effectively when it was made).

“The processes for raising any concerns were also not as developed as they are now.

“In the intervening years, the BBC has introduced other mechanisms and routes for staff to raise concerns.”

In response to the report, the BBC said: “The review considered eight complaints of misconduct about Russell Brand, only two of which were made while he was engaged by the BBC, one formally and one informally.

“It is of great concern that some of these individuals felt unable to raise concerns about Russell Brand’s behaviour at the time, and the BBC has apologised to them as part of this review.

“It is also clear that there were compliance inadequacies on some of Russell Brand’s Radio 2 shows which led to content being aired that would not be broadcast today. Russell Brand left the BBC in 2008 following a high-profile editorial breach.

“As has been reported, there is an ongoing police investigation into Russell Brand. The BBC has been in contact with the Metropolitan Police throughout the review and they have seen the report.

“The BBC acknowledges that Russell Brand categorically denies all public allegations made against him.”

The corporation said “it is clear that presenters have been able to abuse their positions at the BBC”, but there have been changes in procedures since 2008 including a special process for the most serious allegations and concerns, and an anti-bullying and harassment policy.

The review investigated a complaint made by a woman working in the same building as the BBC’s office in Los Angeles – in which she alleged Brand flashed her and later laughed about the encounter on his radio show in 2008.

She wanted the complaint “escalated” further, and it was to an LA line manager in 2019 and was subsequently claimed to have been passed on to BBC News in London.

Mr Johnston said that “the compliance process in place for pre-recorded shows around the time of the original broadcast did not do what it was supposed to in respect of this episode”.

He said the response at the time was “inadequate”, along with the handling of the 2019 complaint.

Another allegation looked at a claim made by a woman called “Alice”, who alleged BBC cars transported her including from her school to his house when she was 16 and alleged to be in a relationship with Brand.

Mr Johnston spoke to Alice, and looked at her claims, including interviewing drivers and looking at Brand’s access to cars during his time at 6 Music, and said it is “highly unlikely that the cars described by Alice were ‘chauffeur driven’ BBC cars or BBC management cars”.

“If Russell Brand did persuade a taxi or mini-cab pre-booked on his behalf by the BBC to make these journeys, I find that this is likely to have been done without the knowledge of the BBC staff who booked his cars for him in advance and to and from fixed locations,” he added.

“Alice also agrees that this is likely to be the case.”

The report investigated a complaint made by a BBC employee who, after raising formal concerns in 2007, requested to leave Brand’s Radio 2 show.

The staff member alleged Brand urinated in a cup and a bottle, and “behaved in an aggressive manner throwing objects at the screen in anger”.

Mr Johnston found the member of staff told his line manager, who then spoke with Ms Douglas.

Ms Douglas claims she does “not recall these concerns ever being raised with her and disputes the review’s reliance upon what she considers to be unspecific hearsay evidence”.

Mr Johnston said he finds “it clear that the perception for most staff working on these shows was that Russell Brand and the then controller did have a close working relationship”, which she has denied.

The staff member continued to raise concerns in 2013 and 2016, the report says.

The report also said “no current or former BBC staff we spoke to confirmed having direct knowledge of Russell Brand having sex in toilets/on BBC premises” or knowledge of allegations he had “inappropriate engagement with competition winners”.

However, a person claimed to the review they had “consensual sex with Russell Brand on BBC premises”, after winning a competition on his 6 Music show.

They said they felt Brand “abused his position” and had “taken advantage of them”, according to the report.

Mr Johnston said: “Some confirmed directly that they witnessed Russell Brand urinating in the studio – which by necessity will have involved him exposing himself – and some of the compliance forms for pre-recorded shows we have reviewed and shows we have listened to refer to exposure in the studio being discussed during shows.”

He also said that a few people closely involved in Brand’s show described him “as promiscuous or out-of-control, but said that they did not witness anything non-consensual or potentially illegal, nor did they make complaints about this at the time”.

Mr Johnston said one person did allege they had a “non-consensual encounter with Russell Brand on the set of a BBC radio production”, with the person claiming he “tucked his fingers down their trousers and underwear and pulled them towards him”.

The person did not make a complaint to the BBC at the time, the report said.

In November, the Crown Prosecution Service confirmed it was considering bringing charges against Brand.

The Met said it received a number of reports of sexual offences from women in London and elsewhere in the country after the investigation.

A man in his 40s was interviewed by officers three times under caution in relation to the allegations, the force said at the time.

The large majority of costs of the review were for legal fees (£597,300), with additional costs incurred for staff to support the review (£60,840) and resources to support the interviews (£3,920).

The report said Brand declined to participate in the review, but he and his solicitors were given information about its “proposed findings”, and did not respond.

A total of 39 people were interviewed.

Ms Childs said: “The BBC’s acknowledgement that Brand was perceived as too influential for staff to complain about and that some presenters had been able to abuse their positions, is deeply troubling.

“It’s critical that people feel safe to raise concerns at work, especially in a sector where power imbalances are particularly extreme.”

She added that high-profile cases such as Brand, which Bectu raised with broadcasters in 2023, have “done little to shift the dial on the industry’s bullying and harassment problem”, according to the industry body’s research.

Ms Childs added: “Many creative industry workers will today feel frustrated that the same warm words about change are being bandied about, but it is clear that a radical step-change is needed for the sector to meaningfully tackle this issue.”

She welcomed the establishment of the new Creative Industries Independent Standards Authority body but said broadcasters need to “support a culture where workers are confident that allegations are taken seriously”.

Ms Nandy said: “The complaints against Russell Brand set out in this report are horrendous. As is the fact that staff felt unable to raise concerns because they did not think that they would be believed or taken seriously.

“I commend those who bravely came forward to share their appalling experiences. The BBC must now reflect on the conclusions and take action to reassure its staff and the wider public that it takes these issues seriously.”

She added this case was not unique and called for action so “power imbalances and a perception that certain stars cannot be challenged” are addressed.

“The BBC, and the wider industry, must now urgently consider what more they can do to make sure that abuse and harassment by anyone, no matter who they are, is not tolerated in any of their workplaces,” Ms Nandy also said.