Labour’s new press secretary is Starmer’s most scandalous appointment yet

The Telegraph has revealed that Keir Starmer has appointed David Dinsmore, a former editor of the Sun, to the newly created position of “permanent secretary for communications” at the heart of the Labour Party government.

This is no token gesture: the role is a senior civil service post, charged with overhauling the government’s communication machine of some 7,000 officers—a post for which Starmer personally interviewed candidates and evidently concluded that Dinsmore best understands “modern communication challenges”.

Labour: yet another disgrace

The choice is a disgrace.

The Sun is openly a right‑wing tabloid, long associated with sensationalism, racism, misogyny, homophobia, conservative agendas, and visceral hostility toward Labour. In sharp ideological contrast, the Labour Party is supposed to be left wing, rooted in working‑class solidarity, social justice, and public service investment. To install a former editor of the Sun at the nerve‑centre of Labour communications is jarring and on the face of it, politically incoherent.

Dinsmore edited the Sun from 2013 to 2015, before becoming COO of News UK and rising further after skipping incremental steps such as the Tory‑aligned Andy Coulson or Blair’s ally Alastair Campbell—the very lineage Starmer presumably seeks to distance himself from. During his tenure, he resisted dropping Page 3 until widespread condemnation made the move inevitable—and was branded “sexist of the year” in 2014 by End Violence Against Women. 

But it’s the fallout from the Sun’s horrific 1989 Hillsborough coverage that makes this appointment especially toxic.

The toxic Sun and that revolving door

To this day, many in Liverpool refuse to engage with the paper, which infamously scapegoated victims and their families in the wake of one of modern Britain’s worst tragedies. Starmer, himself a former DPP who helped prosecute those responsible for the phone‑hacking scandal—including News UK executives—has spoken critically of the Sun on multiple occasions. And yet now he installs its ex-editor at the heart of his own government’s message machine.

This reeks of hypocrisy. Starmer’s past criticisms of the Sun over Hillsborough are well‑documented: he has not shied away from condemning the paper’s slurs. Yet now, in pursuit arguably of media polish or restored mainstream legitimacy, he empowers a man tied to those same publications.

Moreover, this reinforces the pernicious revolving door between journalists and politicians in British politics. Dinsmore joins a growing tradition: Alastair Campbell (ex‑Daily Mirror) under Blair; Andy Coulson (ex‑News of the World) under Cameron; Allegra Stratton (ex-BBC) under Johnson; Amanda de Botton (ex-ITV) under Sunak. Labour once prided itself on social democratic ideals—but now appears comfortable recycling right‑wing journalists into senior government roles.

Starmer in turmoil?

That dynamic invites serious questions: Are communications professionals meant to shape political narratives, or are they meant to be ideological advocates? By placing someone steeped in the Sun’s worldview at the apex of its comms infrastructure, Labour risks internal dissent, a loss of coherence, and alienation of its core base.

Starmer’s choice also betrays a broader strategic contradiction. His push to woo the Sun and other Murdoch titles—as commentators have noted—is already controversial, seen by some as symptomatic of Blair‑style media appeasement that voters no longer respect. Yet rather than purge that strategy, this appointment doubles down on it. It sends the stark message: Labour is not only courting right‑wing media, it is staffing its operation with their veterans.

To be fair, the Telegraph and Guardian note that Starmer was personally involved in the selection and believed Dinsmore would deliver much‑needed technical proficiency. But should efficiency outweigh integrity? The optics are disastrous. As Labour prepares to hold its annual conference in Liverpool this autumn—a city still in deep pain over the Sun’s Hillsborough coverage—this feels less like savvy positioning and more like gross insensitivity.

As a government whose popularity has collapsed, Starmer might argue that professional communications leadership is essential. But the question is: at what cost?

Labour should be ashamed

Government communications is not a data‑driven marketing machine—it is a platform to uphold public accountability and democratic values. Handing it over to someone who once presided over one of Fleet Street’s most reviled titles risks normalising tabloid sleaze at the heart of power.

Ultimately, what this appointment says is: Starmer values media “savvy” and right-wing values over left-wing ones, and is willing to blur the line between his party’s credentials and the very tabloid rage it once opposed. It’s a gamble that risks further alienating the few core voters Labour claims to represent that it has left.

Jeremy Corbyn and Zarah Sultana are probably rubbing their hands with glee.

Featured image via the Canary