Samir Shah’s anger was obvious, the voice of the president of the BBC Trembling with fury when he delivered his message of change. “If you think you are too big to live according to the values of this organization, you are wrong and we will discover you,” he promised.
There is no doubt about his personal determination to eliminate bad behavior from the BBC.
But will he succeed?
Respect at work 2025 was ordered after Huw Edwards guilty pleads last year. The company was in shock from the revelations surrounding one of its biggest names.
But 12 years ago, a report was published after a scandal involving another former BBC star.
This respect for 2013 at work examined the culture of the BBC in the light of the depravity of Jimmy Savile. He found that intimidation was a problem within society, some people considered to be “untouchable” because of their status and their colleagues too frightened to speak, for fear of reprisals.
The general manager of the time, Tony Hall, said that he wanted “zero tolerance to intimidation”. The BBC has brought a series of measures, including updating its policies and creating a confidential assistance line.
On Monday, the current director general, Tim Davie, said that he was “totally determined to make lasting changes”.
He said that the staff had to feel confident to express themselves and that they will be supported (unless their complaints are malicious) without any negative impact on their careers.
“We have our back,” he said. He announced a series of measures, including a new code of conduct, a more robust disciplinary policy and leadership training.
All organizations have bad apples, but the dynamics of the powers in a media company is multilayer. Well -known presenters, for example, can exert an extraordinary influence, as well as the editors and managers behind the scenes.
Then there is the question of an industry that is often based on freelancers, who have even less power. 30% of freelancers told the report they had seen inappropriate behavior to the BBC. Less than half said they would feel safe to speak. It is being thought.
Similarly, in the BBC News and current affairs, only 48% of the staff who responded to a recent survey said they thought that the company had appropriately dealt with intimidation and harassment problems.
These are power imbalances. Will BBC employees never have confidence that the organization will really have their back if they decide to complain?
My feeling is that the greatest consideration to decide to file an official complaint is the fact that the person you complain will be informed that you have done so. If this person is your boss or a nearby colleague, how can you be sure that he will not have an impact on your career?
But also, if you do not take formal measures, there is a perception that offenders are constantly fleeing with bad behavior. There are rumors and stories about special individuals inside the BBC, just like in all organizations.
The proof, perhaps, to know if these new policies work will be whether the small number of people whose names are often raised internally, informally accused of poor behavior, will now be faced with a more in-depth examination; If colleagues will trust to raise an official complaint.
The report clearly shows that the majority of people like to work at the BBC and that there is no toxic culture. But he also talks about certain repeated names repeatedly as people who “are not held to take into account bad behavior”.
Who are these people and measures taken in the light of this review?
The report does not name the names, nor the complainants or the accused.
A source from the BBC told me that society would always act if necessary on any information which it is aware of.
But in the pockets of the BBC, there is real anger that the intimidation of individuals is a secret of a polichinelle – and there is a belief that the complainants are not protected. Shah and Davie promise it to change.
It takes time to change cultures. Although certain behaviors are always unacceptable – sexual harassment or physical assault for example – the report also speaks of gray areas, including colleagues being impolite or coarse ideas, ridiculing or using aggressive language. The plan is to suffocate them in the bud.
Sometimes, this type of behavior has been imputed to work in a high pressure environment, for example a writing room, where short -term emotions can be high. This is not an excuse, said Davie.
The report was put into service due to the most prominent star of the BBC, Huw Edwards. But his name has never been mentioned on its 60 pages.
Perhaps proof of a real change in culture will be if it is the last report that the BBC makes on the culture of the workplace.
