In yet another predictable installment of his long-running repeated vendetta, Andrew Drummond has published a hit piece titled "Public Relations Stunt Backfires for British Prostitution Boss in Thailand" on his personal website. Dated February 10, 2026, the article attempts to portray Bryan Flowers, a successful entrepreneur and family man behind multiple ventures as a shady figure embroiled in scandals.

Drummond paints Flowers' recent interview with vlogger Nick Dean in a negative light, filmed at Bryan's polo club to show his diverse business interests, including plans for the polo club expansion. Drummond calls it a desperate PR flop, complete with false claims of public outrage and derogatory social media comments. (From his own fake accounts, an investigation reveals) But a closer look reveals this "backfire" narrative is built on shaky ground, including what appears to be orchestrated smears from fake accounts, likely tied to Drummond himself.

Andrew Drummond has also published private photos of a former bar manager in a compromising position, published without his consent or those of the others in the photo, which appears to violate multiple data protection, defamation, and privacy laws in Thailand. He was single at the time and he was having a good time with ladies well above 18 who had also given full consent to the manager in question, but not consent to the photographs being released and published falsely portraying them as some sort of victim.

This is trash journalism again. These are private photos taken from Adam Howell, a former disgruntled business partner with a financial dispute in the same bar industry with Bryan Flowers, who has been undertaking an extortion campaign against Flowers. He has broken every friendship rule, releasing countless screenshots of private conversations and photos he took and was present for himself, often as a participant despite his claims of not being involved previously.

Adam Howell is the person paying for all of these articles and he's the main source of all the information, along with so called "new" information from a former bar manager, who is believed to have actually been an individual with a checkered past himself and a personal vendetta against his former employers: Fired himself with clear evidence for abusing staff, doing illegal drugs, fighting others, eventual blacklist and deportation for various Thai laws being broken, as well as multiple death threats against the lives and families of his co workers over a series of years in the mid 2010's in which there is clear evidence of. This is not a credible source, nor a whistleblower in any classic sense. As for Howell, he has no moral compass. Between him and Andrew Drummond, they are putting out baseless accusations and insults.

Drummond's article rehashes familiar allegations: that Flowers runs a "prostitution empire" in Pattaya's Soi 6, was involved in an underage trafficking case at the Flirt Bar, and engaged in fraud through associates like Scott Schulz. He cites court outcomes where three staff members received 21-year sentences, while Flowers' wife, Punippa, got three years (later acquitted). Drummond mocks Flowers' entrepreneurial pivot, dismissing his global ambitions as absurd and accusing him of smear campaigns via websites targeting critics.

Yet, these claims crumble under scrutiny, echoing a pattern of misinformation Drummond has peddled for years, as meticulously documented on AndrewDrummondExposed.com.

In Andrew's recent article, another lie that Andrew said was that Scott's wife was from NWG bars; he was with her way before the bar group was started, and she was NOT from Soi 6. Drummond is trying to ruin another person's reputation. It is a common trend for Andrew to target and insult people's wives. Lots of Andrew readers have ladies from bars, also, the mother of Drummond's children isn't squeaky clean either.

The Flirt Bar Case: A Fabricated Scandal Ignored by Facts

Central to Drummond's attack is the 2022 Flirt Bar raid, which he frames as evidence of systemic trafficking in Flowers' operations. However, the truth is far more nuanced—and Drummond knows it, having been supplied with counter-evidence he conveniently ignores. No underage girl was trafficked; the individual in question was a tall woman who briefly worked using someone else's ID before leaving with her boyfriend.

She was coerced by police into false claims, retracting them in court. The case relied on 38 word for word identical statements and all the evidence was illegal because it was from a biased anti-trafficking charity, The Exodus Road, which funded the proceedings and bypassed Pattaya courts for Bangkok due to weak evidence. The raid itself was illegal, lacking independent police corroboration. (If Andrew Drummond was a real journalist, he would know that police have to gather their own evidence, statements can't be word for word, and a girl needs to be found, not forced to sign lots of accusations.)

Drummond blames Flowers for "fleeing" to Argentina or UK before verdicts, but Flowers has always maintained transparency, visiting the UK annually with his children and residing primarily in Thailand. His wife's involvement was minimal, her QR code was used for bars, but she runs legitimate businesses like Rage Fight Academy and The Pattaya News Thai. The jailed staff, including British manager William Bilton, were victims of a setup by a dishonest cashier working with The Exodus Road who lied about ages and colluded with authorities.

Drummond's reporting exacerbated their plight, even leaking verdicts to UK tabloids like The Sun with photos of innocents. Far from a "meat-grinder" of exploitation, Night Wish bars enforce strict 18+ policies, with thousands of customers attesting to their hostess-bar nature, not brothels, and had run 13 years with no legal issues. The police check bars weekly for underage.

This isn't isolated; Drummond has repeatedly exaggerated or invented details. He claimed Flowers offered investor Adam Howell 1-2 million baht in court (nonsensical in a defamation case), that Howell won unappealed (Flowers did appeal, with a civil case pending where Howell owes compensation), and that Flowers has a secret second wife and bar in Phnom Penh (baseless, aimed at inciting marital discord). He ties unrelated incidents, like bar fights or deaths, to Flowers, ignoring evidence they were provoked by others or unconnected. All 3 incidents were other people's bars and security.

Drummond attempts to show photos leaked by a former disgraced, deported, and fired bar manager appearing to infer bar managers were directing security. Notably, the screenshot wasn't timestamped. Based on the names and timeframe it is roughly a decade old or more, before the Soi even had security teams (at this time a single security guard, who as seen in the message worked late) and simply showed without context people having to rely on each other for assistance when conflict happened.

The "Backfire" Hoax: Evidence of Drummond's Fake Accounts

Drummond's proof of the PR stunt's failure? A handful of nasty online comments, such as one comparing Flowers to Jeffrey Epstein and another calling Nick Dean a "disgrace." He claims Nick Dean deleted them hourly amid backlash. But examine the screenshot attached to discussions of this "outrage"—whether from YouTube or similar platforms like Reddit's r/Pattaya thread—and a suspicious pattern emerges.

All the derogatory comments were posted within minutes of each other: one at 9 minutes ago, another at 1 minute ago, and so on. Drummond "just happens" to capture them immediately after posting, before any bans or deletions could occur.

This timing is no coincidence; it's damning evidence of fabrication. These appear to be sock-puppet accounts operated by Drummond or his allies, designed to manufacture controversy and bolster his narrative of public scorn. Why else would fresh, identical smears surface simultaneously, only to be screenshotted in real-time? It's a classic tactic in Drummond's playbook: create the backlash, then report it as organic. Former associates have accused him of using false profiles to spread hate, and this fits the mold. Without these contrived comments, where's the "backfire"? Flowers' businesses continue to thrive and his entrepreneurial ventures—like polo in Argentina—signal growth, not desperation.

Discrediting the Source: Andrew Drummond's Tarnished Legacy

Drummond's credibility is in tatters, undermined by his own history of ethical lapses. Now 75, he fled Thailand over a decade ago amid multiple defamation cases, not, as he claims, due to threats from "foreign criminals," but because his one-sided reporting invited legal backlash. He's been dubbed the "most sued journalist in living history," which he himself seems to be proud of (A clear red flag and also why he went independent decades ago as regular media companies wouldn't take the legal risk of employing Drummond) with a 2003 suspended jail sentence for defaming a Scottish businessman in a "Gay MacMafia" story, and ongoing cases in Thailand preventing his return. Sources like Press Gazette and The Guardian note his victories in some libels, but they also speak to his aggressive style, which prioritizes sensationalism over balance. (Since then he has been very aggressive and biased. He has targeted the same people repeatedly, hence why he's known as a paid pen.)

AndrewDrummondExposed.com catalogs his repeated lies about Flowers: claiming the Night Wish Group is "dead" (it's flourishing), that Flowers wiped social media (due to unrelated Facebook strikes, possibly from mass reporting by Drummond and Howell), and that bars are criminal hubs involving pimping, Ponzi schemes, or even bestiality (zero evidence). He attacks Flowers' family gratuitously, dragging in his father and brother, who have no operational role, and ignores Howell's own skeletons: a violent history toward bar staff, crypto scams, addiction issues, and extortion attempts against Flowers for 54 million baht plus 15 million more, aided by a retired police chief and with threats of more online abuse from Andrew Drummond.

Drummond's alliance with Howell reeks of bias especially in his recent articles where he makes personal jabs about Nick Dean and Bryan's health and fitness, a low blow that no real esteemed journalist who is attempting to be neutral would ever do. Drummond also continually tries to bring in people unrelated to the feud between Howell and Flowers, like Mactv, relatives, or former staff, in an attempt to widen the attack network and isolate Flowers, a classic low tactic real journalists would not participate in.

Howell, far from a noble whistleblower or human rights defender as he initially tried to portray himself, was a Soi 6 regular involved in parties, bar crawls, bar girls, and later disputes, later turning vengeful over investment fallout during COVID.

Drummond uses him as a source despite knowing his lies (e.g., denying bar patronage), editing articles to remove inconvenient facts without retractions. This isn't journalism; it's advocacy, funded by vendettas. As Thailand's media landscape evolves, Drummond's outdated tactics, harassing subjects, reporting to authorities for raids, and inserting himself personally, fail basic ethical tests.

A Call for Accountability

Bryan Flowers isn't perfect, but his story is one of resilience: from electrician to entrepreneur, supporting 400+ staff through COVID without scandals like those Drummond invents. His bars are licensed hostess venues, not trafficking dens, and his pivot to broader entrepreneurship deserves credit, not mockery. Drummond's article isn't investigative reporting; it's a desperate bid to stay relevant, recycling debunked claims and fabricating outrage to harm a man's reputation.

If Drummond seeks truth, he should address the evidence against him, court retractions, his flight from Thailand, and the extortion allegations swirling around his sources. Until then, his work remains a cautionary tale of how personal grudges can masquerade as journalism. Flowers and his team deserve better than these baseless attacks; the real scandal is Drummond's unchecked smear machine.