Warning: This report contains discriminatory, homophobic language that some may find distressing.

The BBC has apologised to a former radio presenter after an internal investigation found a failure to act in response to homophobic abuse.

Jack Murley alleged he was called homophobic names, including “fairy boy”, by other staff members and told to sound “less gay” on air by a manager.

The 37-year-old was dismissed from BBC Radio Cornwall in 2024 for breaching the organisation’s editorial and social media guidelines after posting online about proposed changes to BBC Local. An employment tribunal found it was “reasonable” and not a result of discrimination over his sexuality.

In a subsequent letter to Murley, the BBC’s chief operating officer across Nations, Jason Horton, apologised on behalf of the organisation for “the behaviours and comments” he was subject to.

“We have worked hard to change the culture for the better across management and the wider team,” Horton said in the letter, adding that work had been done to address the recommendations made.

Horton acknowledged the BBC accepted all the findings but did not believe there were grounds for a financial payout to Murley.

Murley said he was “grateful” to his former colleagues who had provided witness evidence.

“At a time when I was producing an award-winning LGBTQ+ show for the BBC, I was being subjected to the kind of homophobic and bigoted behaviours from BBC staff members that would have been unacceptable decades ago – let alone in a modern workplace,” he said.

He added: “I am glad that the BBC has finally admitted that people in positions of power created and sustained an environment in which my abuse was explicitly and implicitly tolerated by those who should have been expected to stop it.”

A BBC spokesperson said the organisation did not comment on individual cases but took “any reports of our workplace values not being upheld extremely seriously”.

A leaked report by the corporation’s whistleblowing team, detailed that internal investigators examined 12 allegations of abuse and lack of action by management – finding there to be a “case to answer” in eight of these.

The 38-page report contains witness statements from Murley, as well as his colleagues and bosses at the station.

It notes that many of those who gave evidence did so anonymously for fear of retaliation.

Two of the claims relate to a particular colleague who on one occasion found his car blocked by Murley’s car in the office car park.

He allegedly said something to the effect of “fairy boy, you need to move your car”.

Murley reported that this staff member’s behaviour was widely known, but felt there was an onus on him to “laugh it off”.

He provided witness evidence for the two incidents involving this staff member and the report found there was a case to answer.

Murley reported that another staff member told a joke in front of colleagues, which included the homophobic slur “poof”. The report found there was a case to answer for.

In a separate incident with a different colleague, Murley reported being in the staff kitchen talking about being able to donate blood after a change in the law – something he was previously unable to do as a gay man.

Murley claimed the staff member entered the kitchen and said: “I can understand why you were banned (from giving blood). Statistically, your lot are a lot more likely to die of Aids, that’s just a numerical fact.”

The report found that this incident was witnessed by two people, and there was a case to answer for it.

Jack Murley also said he was receiving homophobic abuse in emails, texts, and phone calls from listeners – including one incident in which he received an envelope with Bible verses and homophobic remarks.

After approaching a senior manager, Murley claims he was shocked by the response – in which the manager said it was not his job to deal with the abuse, and the only solution he could offer was for Murley to be “less gay” on air.

For this claim, the report found that Murley had provided direct evidence. Five witnesses gave indirect circumstantial evidence that supported Murley’s claim he was not taken seriously.