Latest news with #BBCWorkplaceCultureReview
The Sun
28-04-2025
- The Sun
The BBC hasn't changed despite all the promises – how many more sex pests, bullies or worse still work there?
READING the BBC's 'new' report into its workplace culture you could be forgiven for thinking you'd taken a spin in Doctor Who's Tardis to 2013. Because, just like 12 years ago, Auntie, the self-appointed high priestess of probity, once again stands decked out in sackcloth, and dusted down with ashes, as the contrition counter hits 11. 3 Back then it was the publication of the so-called Respect At Work report, written by barrister Dinah Rose QC, that had Auntie tucking into the humble pie. Commissioned shortly after a separate report into how Jimmy Savile managed to rape and molest his way around BBC corridors for decades, it revealed a corporation in crisis. Rose found a business with a 'strong undercurrent of fear', riddled with bullying, humiliating and inappropriate behaviour. A workplace of 'untouchable stars' behaving as they wished and without consequences. Toxic behaviour And a staff terrified of raising complaints for fear of being sacked — or simply because they had a 'weary sense' that their concerns would be ignored. A slew of new systems were to be implemented to ensure that the BBC's Values — 'Values' is always pompously capped up by the BBC, as if denoting tablets of stone carved by The Almighty himself — were not compromised by bad actors, like the male stars it hired on eye-watering salaries. There would be more robust procedures to tackle problems, like a hotline to call it out. Bad behaviour would no longer be tolerated, declared the 16-strong management board who all personally signed the report. Yet it was. Time and time again. Fast forward to 2025 and yesterday's long-awaited publication of the BBC Workplace Culture Review and you are hit by a strong sense of deja vu. Staggering sum BBC has paid out probing Huw Edwards and Tim Westwood scandals revealed – sparking fury from victim Same problems, different monster. This time the chief bogeyman was newsreader Huw Edwards, the paedophile who exploited his position as 'national treasure' for years by preying on youngsters, then refused to give back our money when he got found out. A narcissistic pervert — exposed by The Sun, despite the best efforts of the BBC and Edwards' lawyers to stop us — who bestrode the BBC newsroom like 'this God of news', according to staff who loathed his arrogance. Edwards' fall from grace quickly provoked calls for yet another root and branch examination of the BBC's toxic working practices. Yesterday that probe, which questioned 2,580 people 'working with or for the BBC', was finally published, revealing precious little has changed since 2013. Lessons have not been learnt. The report admits the BBC is still beset by bullying and toxic behaviour and staff are fearful that complaining will be 'career limiting'. And even if they do complain they remain convinced that senior managers will not punish the wrongdoing if those doing it are useful to the BBC. These characters who staff believe are 'worth more to the BBC than you are' will, as the report notes, 'continue to thrive, and in some cases are promoted'. Separate figures published by Deadline last week revealed that even when complaints are upheld, about TWO-THIRDS of those staff are kept on, even those who engaged in sexual harassment. Meanwhile, complainants have to endure a 'traumatising . . . unsupportive' process and will ultimately be 'kept in the dark'. Indeed, the BBC's own internal £340,000 report into Edwards, convicted of possessing indecent images of children, was never published and likely never will be, despite numerous complaints made about the presenter by BBC staff. 'Nothing to see here' has been BBC Director-General Tim Davie's aloof position on its publication. It is interesting, yet perhaps not surprising, that yesterday's report does not mention the name Huw Edwards. 3 Yet cocksure Edwards was very much considered one of the 'untouchable' members of staff the report suggests were 'known for getting away with poor behaviour'. He was known to be a 'difficult' 'talent' long before The Sun uncovered the more egregious examples of his behaviour. How many more sex pests, bullies or worse are still active at the Beeb? The BBC would have us believe that the bad apples in its particular orchard are small — 'a minority of people'. But a quick look at its rap sheet since the release of the 2013 report — and its ensuing avalanche of empty promises — would suggest otherwise. Fawn over 'talent' Their behaviours, alleged or otherwise, may be wildly different but for every Huw Edwards, Tim Westwood, Russell Brand, Jermaine Jenas and Gregg Wallace there are scores of people holding them up. And it is these people — the enablers — that harbour the biggest problem for the BBC. And these enablers can often go right to the top of the BBC. They are the ones who enforce the rules, the ones who fawn over the 'talent' and then kick complaints about them into the long grass. Look at the announcement of the report itself, cynically briefed to the BBC's Today programme early yesterday, which duly trotted out the absurd line: 'The BBC understands that the BBC doesn't have a toxic culture.' Needless to say that was not the headline other, more sceptical, news organisations chose to go with when the actual report was released several hours later. So will this review and its 'clear, practical recommendations' — there's that complaints 'hotline' idea again — do what the 2013 report failed to do and stop them? Can Lord Reith's lumbering leopard change its spots? History would suggest otherwise.
Yahoo
28-04-2025
- Yahoo
Bad Apples, Grey Zones & 'No Silver Bullet': What We Learned From The BBC's Workplace Culture Review
As is quite often the case, today's much-anticipated BBC Workplace Culture Review concluded by saying 'there is no quick fix… no silver bullet.' The 62-page review instead acts as a nuanced deep dive into the current state of play regarding bullying, harassment and whistleblowing procedures at the nation's 100-year-old broadcaster, some of which will please top brass and some of which will not. More from Deadline BBC Bullying Review Finds "No Evidence Of Toxic Culture" But Says Behavior Of Small Number Of Individuals "Disproportionately" Affects Reputation & Morale UK Presenter Gregg Wallace "Considered Suicide, Following Tidal Wave Of Abuse" After Behavior Complaints BBC Employees Keep Jobs After Sexually Harassing Colleagues We took an in-depth look at Change Associates' review, which was sparked by ex-news anchor Huw Edwards' guilty plea and has led to a string of recommendations, so you don't have to. Bad apples The headline-grabbing finding of a report that has taken months to compile was that, fundamentally, the BBC is not riddled with a toxic culture but a few bad apples who are ruining it for everyone, both on screen and off. The opening two pages bolded just two sentences, one saying, 'The BBC does not have a toxic culture' and the other blaming a 'minority of people who behave unacceptably and whose behaviour is not addressed,' which disproportionately hurts others. The report declined to name names but there have of course been a string of high-profile allegations made against former and current BBC presenters of late, including the likes of Edwards, Russell Brand and Gregg Wallace (both Brand and Wallace deny illegality and Brand says all relationships were consensual). Presenters spoke of feeling 'embarrassed and ashamed to be associated with people who feature in the press for their behavioural misdemeanours.' But just how much BBC top brass is aware of the bad apples and how they deal with them when they are aware is another matter entirely? In one of the reports' most intriguing sections, the authors said they had heard examples of presenters who are 'seen to be 'difficult' and who are 'manmarked' by BBC managers.' 'The managers are aware of the presenters' reputations and want to act as a buffer – to be on hand and provide feedback and reassurance in real-time,' it read. 'This is very different to addressing poor behaviour in the first place.' A lack of contact for employees with senior management was a frequent mention, with some commenting that they saw the Director General more often than their team leaders, which brews dissatisfaction. Another described the complaints process as 'traumatising, unsupportive and overly long.' 'Grey zones': where is the line? In a section entitled 'Who talks straight with the talent?,' the review spoke of confusion around who is supposed to speak with whom over bad behavior from people with power. A 'power imbalance' leads to a 'void when it comes to straight talking,' the report claimed. It made frequent mention of what it termed 'grey zones,' behavior that many would deem unacceptable and yet might not fall foul of the BBC code of conduct, which has of today been beefed up. 'There is still not a shared understanding of what is acceptable and what is not acceptable behaviour, and this is mainly because of so many 'shades of grey' – things that are 'close to the line' but not clearly unacceptable,' the report claimed. 'The danger is that 'grey' behaviours push the line of what's acceptable, and someone will keep pushing the boundary a little further until the environment becomes overtly hostile.' Generational shifts come into play here. Driven by movements like Black Lives Matter and MeToo, the report noted that younger Generation Z employees have different expectations than their older, more senior colleagues. Those in positions of power 'share stories of what used to be accepted – throwing furniture, drinking on the premises – and rightly comment how far things have come – but do they understand what is and is not acceptable today?,' the report questioned. It's a two way street Yet while the report was laden with testimony from junior people struggling with senior colleagues and processes (Jewish and Muslim staff were said to be particularly unhappy with their concerns not being acted upon since October 7th), the authors were keen to stress that the manager-employee relationship is a two-way street. In an illuminating section titled 'protecting leaders… from vexatious claims and upwards/sideways bullying,' the report unearthed 'instances of unreasonable behaviour from employees to their managers, such as sending abusive emails, behaving aggressively in meetings or even making inappropriate comments that they get away with.' This problem is 'unique' to the corporation and is often paired with vexatious claims that lead to months-long investigations that seemingly go nowhere, the report found. It blamed some individuals lower down the chain for publicly criticizing the BBC or leaking stories to the media. This didn't stop the review taking an eye-catching pop at some senior leaders mind, as it chastised those who 'seemingly coast and whose reluctance to embrace change and deal with longstanding issues frustrates those they lead.' Things have got better Much food for thought in Change Associates' review but things certainly weren't all bad. 'Overall, I think the BBC culture has got better over the last ten years,' said one interviewee. 'Behaviour has improved in line with societal change, and we have more leaders who reflect that and lead their teams in a more modern, commercial way.' This was one of a number of quotes littered through the five dozen pages about how the situation has improved when compared with the previous comparable review, which was conducted a decade ago in the wake of the Jimmy Savile scandal. Director General Tim Davie came in for some praise and for hiring more leaders who bring a 'diversity of thought' or were plucked from commercial outfits. There was an acknowledgement that running a 21,000-staff public service organization under intense scrutiny and pressure is no easy feat and the review stressed that key messages about what it's like working for the BBC are landing better in recent years. Actions now speak louder than words Review such as Change Associates', especially those examining somewhat nebulous phrases like 'Workplace Culture,' tend to be met with a degree of cynicism and today's is no different. 'I do hope some change will come as a result of this review. But this is hope, not expectation,' said one interviewee summarizing the cynicism. The phrase 'zero tolerance' was picked apart given high profile examples of those who have exhibited bad behavior and remained with the BBC, and the proof will now be in what comes next. BBC top brass will be desperate for a lengthy period of no negative bad headlines around specific talent, which often undoes many people's hard work. At the same time, we are told the BBC has already brought in a new code of conduct with specific guidance for on-air presenters (recommendation one), while also moving to make its disciplinary policy more robust. A fascinating recommendation that called for the development of a 'dashboard to monitor culture indicators' will also be worth keeping an eye on. The BBC has also pledged to work with new anti-bullying body CIISA, which has been struggling to get off the ground in earnest but could play a crucial role. Today's review looked back as much as it looked forward, but living in the past won't address the concerns of the cynics. Best of Deadline Francis Ford Coppola's Career In Photos, From 'Apocalypse Now' To 'The Godfather' Everything We Know About The 'Hunger Games: Sunrise On The Reaping' Movie So Far Everything We Know About Netflix's 'The Thursday Murder Club' So Far
