Key findings: BBC review into conduct of Russell Brand

It is “clear that presenters have been able to abuse their positions” at the BBC in the past, a review into the corporation’s handling of complaints against Russell Brand has said.

The review into the conduct of Brand when he was a presenter for BBC Radio 2 and 6 Music between 2006 and 2008 was launched after a joint investigation by The Sunday Times, The Times and Channel 4 Dispatches revealed four women had accused him of sexual assaults at the height of his fame between 2006 and 2013.

The 49-year-old actor and comedian denies the accusations, and previously said all his sexual relationships were “absolutely always consensual”.

The review considered eight complaints of alleged misconduct about Brand, two of which were made while he was employed by the BBC, one formally and one informally.

A formal complaint was made by a BBC employee in 2007 when Brand urinated in a cup during the recording of a BBC Radio 2 show, and into a bottle during a second show, as well as allegedly behaving in an aggressive manner throwing objects at the screen in anger when a mistake was made by the production team.

The complaint was made to the employee’s line manager, who claims they raised this complaint verbally with the then-controller of Radio 2.

The then-controller of Radio 2 said she does not recall these concerns ever being raised with her and claims that a press response given by the BBC in relation to the accusations at the time was not signed off by her.

“This press coverage and statement could have been picked up by BBC management and pursued further but it is clear that, regrettably, the 2007 incident was not taken seriously at the time,” the report by Peter Johnston, BBC director of editorial complaints and reviews, states.

“It is clear to me that the formal complaint in 2007 about the 2007 incident was not investigated as it should have been. An opportunity was also missed to properly challenge Russell Brand on his inappropriate behaviour in BBC studios.”

In 2016, the same member of staff contacted the BBC to again report the 2007 incident and further rumours they had heard including Brand bringing groups of girls into BBC premises, which prompted enquires to be made, but an investigation into the 2007 incident was not pursued further as they felt it was “too long after”.

Other rumoured allegations of misconduct Johnston learnt of during the review included Brand having sex in toilets/on BBC premises; exposure in the studio; and inappropriate engagement with competition winners, with some rumoured incidents being mentioned in Brand’s autobiography.

One individual came forward to say they had a sexual encounter with Brand in a BBC disabled toilet, and while the incident was consensual they felt the presenter had “abused his position and taken advantage of them”.

Another individual who came to the BBC as a competition winner on Brand’s 6 Music show confirmed they had consensual sex with the presenter on BBC premises.

The report states: “What is clear is that many BBC staff and freelancers, especially in more junior roles, found Russell Brand demanding and difficult to work with and his behaviour extreme, but all felt that there was no point in complaining as they believed they would not be listened to and, rightly or wrongly, that Russell Brand as a high-profile presenter had the support of the station management.”

One complainant alleged Brand followed her into a bathroom and showed her his penis moments before he began pre-recording his radio show from the LA Bureau of the BBC in 2008, which he then later referenced on-air.

The complainant, who was not a BBC employee, did not raise the complaint at the time but was encouraged to do so in 2019 by a BBC News staff member and it was escalated within the corporation.

“My finding is 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”, the report finds.

“Specifically, that the on-air references were not caught and/or interrogated through that process before the pre-recorded episode was broadcast. I therefore find that the compliance process, in respect of this pre-recorded episode, was inadequate.

“The handling of the eventual 2019 complaint by the BBC was also inadequate.”

Some of those responsible for Brand at the BBC believed they were, or perceived themselves to be, disempowered, according to the report.

Producers did not feel they were able to exercise full control of the content and some of the management lines appeared confused at times, it states.

“As a general comment, I find that there was an apparent power dynamic and hierarchy surrounding these shows, as the presenter was perceived to be too influential,” the report states.

“I find there should have been better systems in place to ensure that Russell Brand’s unacceptable behaviour was promptly picked up and addressed and that all of those involved felt able to raise any concerns.”

Presenters, and Brand in particular, held “great sway and he was perceived to have a direct line to the then-controller, who would be expected to back him”, the report finds.

Mr Johnston states that staff “felt that there was no point in raising a concern as it would not be listened to and may adversely affect the prospects of those complaining”.

The report also claims the then-controller feels the management tier below her “should have been on top of all the day-to-day operations and compliance and should have picked up and dealt with any behavioural problems” and she “would have dealt properly with any issues raised with her”.

It adds: “I find 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.

“The then-controller has denied this in the strongest terms stating: that Russell Brand never once sought to exercise any influence over her; that to her knowledge, no one was ever moved off the programme at Russell Brand’s whim; that her relationship with him was professional and proper, akin to that she maintained with all of the key presenters on the station; and she maintains that she rarely interacted with him.

“The then-controller also stated that Russell Brand was not a main concern of hers or Radio 2 and did not need to be kept happy or retained. Despite this, I am satisfied that the evidence I have heard shows a clear perception from members of staff that Russell Brand had preferential access to the then-controller.”

The report 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 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,” it states.

“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.”

The corporation has since introduced a range of measures including a specialist case management process which considers the most serious allegations and concerns raised.

Its anti-bullying and harassment policy has been “strengthened” several times and a dedicated “support at work” team has been set up to address bullying and harassment cases.

It has also aimed to centralise and standardise its complaints processes and updated compliance processes including for all pre-recorded non-news programming to be reviewed by a senior content maker and for a compliance form to be submitted before the show is broadcast.

There is also an enhanced referral process for editorial issues and “strengthened” editorial guidance for intimidation and humiliation.