Complaint
A listener complained about a range of issues relating to this series of six podcasts which examined the history of the beer company, BrewDog.  The complainant alleged the ±«Óătv’s reporting was “biased, inaccurate and designed to be inflammatory and harming” and suggested many of the issues highlighted by the ±«Óătv were “t°ůľ±±ąľ±˛ą±ô” or “standard practice” in all companies and “not newsworthy.” The ECU considered the various aspects of the complaint against the standards of accuracy, impartiality and fairness set out in the ±«Óătv Editorial Guidelines.
Outcome
The programme-makers began investigating allegations about the company after former employees published a letter in June 2021 under the banner “Punks With Purpose”. In the letter they said BrewDog and its co-founder, James Watt, had “fostered a culture within craft beer that deifies founders, and gives weight to sexist and misogynistic brewers who claim to be standing up for free speech”. The letter accused the company of, among other things, “toxic attitudes towards junior staff” and said “The true culture of BrewDog is, and seemingly always has been, fear”. The letter prompted other ex-employees to come forward for the first time and speak about their experiences. There was therefore a public interest in looking at the way the company was run, and there were good editorial reasons for conducting an in-depth investigation.
The primary focus of the series was on events leading up to, and subsequent to, the Punks With Purpose letter.  The final episode set out BrewDog’s response to a related Disclosure documentary, which included threats of legal action against the ±«Óătv. The episode reflected the company’s public allegations about former members of staff who featured in the documentary, reported claims of intimidation from those who contributed to the programme, explained BrewDog’s response (which included commissioning an independent review of the company’s culture) and outlined the positive reaction from current staff to James Watt’s decision to give 5% of the business to employees.
Overall it was the ECU’s view that the podcasts were fair to BrewDog and its supporters. The programme-makers took proper account of facts and relevant opinion when it came to reporting allegations about the culture of the company. Material was obtained from first-hand sources and corroborated where possible. Dates were given and listeners were made aware of the timescale over which concerns were raised by people who worked for the company. The allegations were put to BrewDog and its response was fairly reflected.
Not upheld