After Russell Brand’s trial, television insiders say the culture that appeared to indulge his behaviour has not gone away, with workers still worried about speaking up, The Guardian reports.
The criminality exposed during Brand’s trial has led to difficult questions for the BBC, Channel 4 and the production companies that worked with him.
One researcher, Naomi Harvey, recounted how she and her colleagues noticed Brand’s habit of asking runners to obtain phone numbers of female audience members. After a distraught audience member phoned to complain about being invited for drinks by Brand after a show, Harvey said she and two colleagues reported the matter to their next boss. “We never heard anything again,” she said.
The Banijay UK report found that informal complaints about Brand were “not properly escalated or adequately addressed”. Banijay owns the production company behind shows including Big Brother’s Big Mouth. The BBC apologised after its review found some people who had concerns about Brand’s behaviour believed he “would always get his own way” and stayed silent. Channel 4’s review found a complaint was not escalated to its senior management team. All three said they had improved safeguarding and whistleblowing efforts.
Alex Mahon, the former Channel 4 executive who ordered the network's report, acknowledged that "bad behaviour towards women was tolerated in television for too long". She said: "It's improving but more than half of people who experience bullying or harassment in the industry still don't report it. And in other industries it is still rife. We're not finished."
But TV insiders say the Brand case cannot simply be written off as a problem of a bygone era. One insider said: “The rule of TV is and will always be: say nothing, don't rock the boat and take whatever a celeb does without complaint as nothing will ever be done (and you'll probably be branded a troublemaker and get blackballed).”
Harvey said she believed broadcasters were more willing to listen, but worried that power imbalances and fear of being seen as a troublemaker remained. "A lot of the time, people don't speak up because they're worried about losing their jobs," she said. "But also, they don't think anything's going to change because it's easier to get rid of you, as a freelancer."
A new online portal for reporting harassment and abuse concerns across the UK's creative industries has been launched, but many insiders say the Brand case cannot simply be dismissed as a bygone-era problem.
Analysis
Why This Matters
- The persistence of this culture means many workers still fear retaliation for reporting abuse.
- The failure to escalate informal complaints points to systemic weaknesses in safeguarding.
- The trial showed how celebrity and commercial value can shield misconduct for years.
Background
Russell Brand, a comedian and broadcaster who rose to fame in the 2000s, faced a trial that exposed years of abusive behaviour. Allegations emerged in 2023 after a joint investigation by Channel 4's Dispatches and the Sunday Times. A history of public misogyny, including the "Sachsgate" scandal, had been tolerated.
Key Perspectives
Alex Mahon (former Channel 4 executive): said bad behaviour towards women was tolerated for too long, and that while it is improving, most people still do not report bullying or harassment.
TV insiders: said the culture remains one of silence; one insider said the rule is to say nothing and not rock the boat.
Naomi Harvey (former researcher): said broadcasters are more willing to listen but fear of losing work as a freelancer still stops people speaking up.
What to Watch
- Whether the new reporting portal leads to a rise in formal complaints.
- Any further broadcasting regulator or parliamentary action on safeguarding.
- Whether broadcasters follow through on commitments to improve whistleblowing.
Checked
12 claims in this story checked against 1 source: 9 supported.
Show each claim
- SupportedTV insiders say the misogyny and sexism associated with the Russell Brand case have not gone away.UK news | The Guardian: “Misogyny and sexism of Russell Brand case have not gone away, TV insiders say.”
- Partly supportedBroadcasters’ reviews found that some complaints were not properly escalated.UK news | The Guardian: “Banijay’s report found no formal complaints were made about Brand, but complaints made informally – including some about him asking runners to obtain phone numbers of audience members – were “not properly escalated or adequately addressed”. The Channel 4 review found a complaint was not escalated to its senior management team.”
- Not in the sourcesThe story’s events are set after Russell Brand’s trial.UK news | The Guardian: “The episode is minor when set against the criminality exposed during Brand’s trial.”
- Partly supportedThe criminality exposed during Brand’s trial led to difficult questions for the BBC, Channel 4 and production companies that worked with him.UK news | The Guardian: “Brand’s case has led to difficult questions for the BBC, Channel 4 and the production companies that worked with him.”
- SupportedHarvey said she and two colleagues reported the audience member’s complaint to their next boss and heard nothing further.UK news | The Guardian: ““We felt as the audience team we had a responsibility, so me and my two colleagues reported it up to our next boss. “We never heard anything again.””
- SupportedBanijay’s report found informal complaints about Brand were “not properly escalated or adequately addressed”.UK news | The Guardian: “Banijay’s report found no formal complaints were made about Brand, but complaints made informally – including some about him asking runners to obtain phone numbers of audience members – were “not properly escalated or adequately addressed”.”
- SupportedThe BBC review found that some people with concerns about Brand believed he “would always get his own way” and stayed silent.UK news | The Guardian: “The BBC apologised after its review found there were people who had concerns about Brand’s behaviour, but believed he “would always get his own way” and stayed silent.”
- SupportedChannel 4’s review found a complaint was not escalated to its senior management team.UK news | The Guardian: “The Channel 4 review found a complaint was not escalated to its senior management team.”
- SupportedMahon said bad behaviour towards women was tolerated in television for too long, and that more than half of people experiencing bullying or harassment in the industry still do not report it.UK news | The Guardian: ““Bad behaviour towards women was tolerated in television for too long,” said Alex Mahon, the former Channel 4 executive who ordered the Brand report. “People don’t stay silent because they don’t know it’s wrong. They stay silent because they don’t trust what happens if they speak. It’s improving … but more than half of people who experience bullying or harassment in the industry still don’t report it.””
- SupportedAn insider said the rule of TV is to say nothing, not rock the boat and accept celebrities’ behaviour without complaint because nothing will be done.UK news | The Guardian: “One insider said: “The rule of TV is and will always be: say nothing, don’t rock the boat and take whatever a celeb does without complaint as nothing will ever be done (and you’ll probably be branded a troublemaker and get blackballed).””
- SupportedHarvey said people often fear losing their jobs and may think nothing will change because it is easier to get rid of a freelancer.UK news | The Guardian: ““A lot of the time, people don’t speak up because they’re worried about losing their jobs,” she said. “But also, they don’t think anything’s going to change because it’s easier to get rid of you, as a freelancer.””
- SupportedA new online portal for reporting harassment and abuse concerns across the UK’s creative industries has launched.UK news | The Guardian: “A long-awaited online portal that allows workers across the UK’s creative industries to report harassment and abuse concerns has finally launched.”