Given the anger from his own supporters that would inevitably follow, the prime minister must have had good reasons for appointing David Dinsmore as head of government communications. The 57-year-old Scot, who moves in this November, has done three wicked things. He edited The Sun, a crime that is not mitigated by his being a blameless cub reporter on Clydeside when the tabloid reported the Hillsborough disaster in 1989. He was voted “sexist of the year” in 2014 for continuing to run topless models when he was Sun editor, a sin unredeemed by his killing off the page a year later. He has spent most of his career in the pay of Rupert Murdoch, rising to be chief operations officer at News UK.

Oh, and he went to Strathallan School, which competes with Tony Blair’s Fettes College in the Scottish premier league of public schools. But no one seems to be after him for that, so far.

While we are the first to celebrate the elevation of journalists, the Murdoch connection does ring alarm bells. First, there is the culture of the news organisation the 94-year-old magnate has presided over; second, his influence on British politics for almost 50 years. Is Mr Dinsmore a fit person to be appointed to a permanent secretary level of the Civil Service? And is he coming in as emissary, minder, go-between? On the first, he has not been in the frame for phone hacking and other dubious practices. As to the second, it’s a conspiracy theory that fails to stand scrutiny. He is coming in to run communications, not create policy. If the No 10 and Murdoch camps want to talk to each other, they do.

But why bring him in, knowing the row that will follow? The job is to get to grips with what the government is saying and how it is saying it. Two figures in recent memory did it successfully, both from tabloid backgrounds. Andy Coulson, a former News of the World editor brought rigour to David Cameron’s communications until he resigned and was later

imprisoned over phone hacking. He followed a blueprint written by Alastair Campbell, the sometime Daily Mirror political editor who had done the job for Tony Blair. Mr Campbell is remembered for three things: a snappy encapsulation of whatever the government was doing – “She was the people’s princess” – rigorous punishment of ministers and advisers who engaged in freelance communication, and control of the parliamentary lobby, threatening with de facto exclusion those journalists who did not toe the approved line.

Lazy thinking naturally places Mr Dinsmore in the same territory; lazy thinking ignores his humour and charm. He will indeed be expected to help establish a more coherent explanation of government activities, not least in combating the straight-talking, gut appeal of Reform. He will also be expected to introduce discipline into a political world in which too many special advisers publicise unapproved policies designed only to present their ministers in a good light. As for control of the lobby, that is hard, given remaining memories of the times they bent the knee to Mr Campbell. In any case, the lobby long since lost any monopoly on stories.

It is a mistake to look at Mr Dinsmore and see only a tabloid journalist, a type believed by the governing classes to have a unique ability to understand and talk to “working people”. He is wanted because he brings with him the skills of an executive who has helped transform a newspaper business to a multimedia company, a man who understands the digital world, used to running teams and getting stuff done.

What’s in it for him, apart from a big reduction in salary, becoming the lightning rod for the prime minister and inevitable battles not only with the political commissars who challenge his right to direct the communications of their government, but also with all those civil servants who famously reject change? Well, for all the joy to be had in journalism, we understand the attraction of getting to the heart of government, the thrill of being “in the room”. Come on, who doesn’t fancy walking through that door in Downing Street?

As we wait to see what he can do, we offer one piece of advice, which is to return to the language he used as a sub editor. We worry that his quote on his appointment suggests he has succumbed to the corporate world: “The media landscape is evolving at a rapid pace, supercharged by AI, and I look forward to helping the government leverage the exciting opportunities in front of us.” You count the clichés: we gave up at five.
KF