Andy Burnham has admitted he cares less than previous prime ministers about what right-wing media outlets such as the Sun and Daily Mail think about him.
Ever since moving into Number 10 Downing Street, Burnham has made clear he is going to try and do things differently when it comes to his messaging and communication strategy.
One of the main ways this has shown itself is in the Labour leader’s use of TikTok to share videos about policy – and also more lighthearted content on pub snacks.
This hasn’t gone down well with some, who have accused Burnham of not taking a serious enough approach to his role.
But the prime minister has now defended his social media strategy – and taken a swipe at the traditional right wing outlets in the British media that were so successful in bringing down his predecessor Keir Starmer.
In an interview with ITV News to mark his first 100 days in office, Burnham was asked what his response would be to people who say he shouldn’t be doing light-hearted TikTok videos.
Burnham said he was simply trying to connect with people more through different channels, adding: “We used to have a laugh in this country didn’t we?”
He was then asked by journalist Daniel Hewitt: “Is it also a sign that you care less than your predecessors about what the traditional media say about you, what the Daily Mail, what the Sun write about you?”
Burnham responded: “Oh, definitely. I left Westminster for a reason. I got fed up with commentators deciding things down there and then the whole word [is] meant to believe what they believe.
“I’m sorry, but the world’s not like that anymore.”
Earlier this year, there were reports that Burnham would limit the Sun’s access to him by refusing to grant them any exclusive interviews or requests for published articles.
This marked a significant change of tack to Starmer, who often gave exclusive interviews to the right-wing paper.
It was reported that a factor in this was that Burnham still harbours animosity towards the publication, following their coverage of the 1989 Hillsborough Disaster.
ANDY BURNHAM ADMITS HE’S NOT BOTHERED BY WHAT THE SUN AND MAIL THINK OF HIM – PRIME MINISTER FIRES BACK AT BRITAIN’S RIGHT-WING PRESS!
Prime Minister Andy Burnham has delivered a striking message to Britain’s powerful newspaper industry, admitting that he is far less concerned about what publications such as The Sun and the Daily Mail think of him than previous prime ministers.
In an outspoken interview with ITV News, Burnham made clear that he has no intention of allowing traditional newspaper commentators to dictate his political agenda or determine how the public should view his government.
His comments have sparked a wider debate about the relationship between politicians and the British media, particularly at a time when social media platforms are changing how political leaders communicate with voters.
Asked directly whether he cared less than his predecessors about negative coverage from traditional newspapers, Burnham gave a remarkably straightforward response.
“Oh, definitely,” he replied.
He then explained that leaving Westminster had been motivated partly by his frustration with political commentators who, in his view, exercised too much influence over national political discussions.
“I left Westminster for a reason. I got fed up with commentators deciding things down there and then the whole world is meant to believe what they believe. I’m sorry, but the world’s not like that anymore.”
The remarks were immediately interpreted as a direct challenge to the traditional political-media relationship.
For a Prime Minister who has spent years operating within the Westminster system, the message was particularly significant.
Burnham appears determined to communicate with the public on his own terms rather than relying exclusively on newspaper interviews and political television appearances.
THE INTERVIEW THAT EXPOSED BURNHAM’S NEW MEDIA STRATEGY
The comments were made during an ITV News interview on 3 November 2026, marking Burnham’s first 100 days in office.
Journalist Daniel Hewitt questioned the Prime Minister about his growing use of social media, particularly TikTok.
Burnham has increasingly used the platform to communicate directly with voters, discussing government policies while also publishing lighter, more personal content.
Some of his videos have focused on everyday subjects, including food and pub culture.
Critics have questioned whether this approach is appropriate for someone occupying the highest political office in Britain.
They argue that a Prime Minister should maintain a serious public image and avoid appearing overly concerned with social-media popularity.
Burnham, however, defended the strategy.
He suggested that politicians should be willing to communicate through the platforms people actually use rather than expecting the public to follow traditional media channels.
The conversation then moved towards the influence of newspapers such as The Sun and the Daily Mail.
When Hewitt asked whether Burnham cared less about what these publications wrote about him, the Prime Minister answered without hesitation.
His response suggested that the traditional ability of major newspapers to shape political reputations was declining.
For Burnham, the modern media environment provides politicians with opportunities to communicate directly with millions of people without waiting for newspaper editors to decide which stories deserve attention.
A DIRECT CHALLENGE TO THE POWER OF THE RIGHT-WING PRESS
Burnham’s comments have particular significance because Britain’s national newspapers have historically played an influential role in political campaigns.
For decades, newspapers such as The Sun and the Daily Mail have been capable of shaping national conversations through their front pages, political endorsements and editorial campaigns.
Their influence has extended beyond simply reporting political developments.
They have often helped establish the issues that dominate public debate and determine how political leaders are presented to voters.
Previous prime ministers have therefore invested considerable effort in maintaining relationships with newspaper proprietors and senior editors.
Some governments have actively sought favourable newspaper coverage, believing that a positive relationship with major publications could strengthen their electoral prospects.
Burnham appears less interested in continuing that tradition.
His argument is that the media landscape has fundamentally changed.
Millions of people now receive political information through social networks, online publications, podcasts and independent broadcasters.
A negative newspaper headline no longer necessarily determines how every voter understands a political issue.
That does not mean traditional newspapers have become irrelevant.
However, their ability to control the national political conversation has been challenged by the growth of digital communication.
Burnham clearly believes politicians should recognise that change.
WHY THE SUN RELATIONSHIP IS PARTICULARLY SENSITIVE
One of the most important aspects of Burnham’s comments concerns his longstanding relationship with The Sun.
The Prime Minister has never hidden his anger over the newspaper’s coverage of the 1989 Hillsborough disaster.
The tragedy resulted in the deaths of 97 Liverpool supporters, and The Sun published an infamous front-page story containing false allegations about fans.
The newspaper later apologised, but its reporting created lasting anger among families and communities affected by the disaster.
Burnham has repeatedly spoken about the importance of Hillsborough in shaping his political outlook.
In 2009, he delivered an emotional speech at Liverpool’s Anfield stadium demanding justice for the victims.
The issue subsequently became a defining part of his relationship with the newspaper.
Earlier in 2026, reports suggested that Burnham intended to restrict The Sun’s access to exclusive interviews and personal political articles.
His approach represented a significant departure from the strategy adopted by previous Labour leaders.
Keir Starmer, for example, had regularly granted interviews to the newspaper.
Burnham’s position suggests that he is unwilling to prioritise favourable newspaper relationships when doing so conflicts with his personal convictions.
For many Liverpool supporters and Hillsborough campaigners, that position may carry particular significance.
However, the political implications extend much further.
It raises questions about whether a Prime Minister can successfully govern while refusing to participate in some of the traditional media relationships that have shaped British politics for generations.
BURNHAM’S TIKTOK STRATEGY: POLITICS WITHOUT THE MIDDLEMAN
The Prime Minister’s growing use of TikTok is another important part of the story.
Traditional political communication has generally involved speeches, press conferences, newspaper interviews and carefully managed television appearances.
Burnham appears interested in a different approach.
By using social media, he can present government announcements directly to viewers and explain his positions without relying on journalists to select the most important sections of an interview.
This offers several potential advantages.
First, it allows him to reach younger audiences who may not regularly read national newspapers.
Second, it gives him greater control over how his message is presented.
Third, it provides an opportunity to demonstrate a more informal personality.
However, there are also risks.
Social-media communication can encourage politicians to prioritise short videos and memorable statements over detailed policy explanations.
A government cannot solve complicated economic problems through entertaining clips alone.
Voters still need clear information about taxation, public spending, healthcare, housing and national security.
The challenge for Burnham will be balancing accessible communication with the seriousness expected of the office he holds.
His supporters may see his approach as modern and refreshing.
His critics may regard it as an attempt to avoid difficult questions from established journalists.
Either way, his strategy represents a clear departure from conventional political communication.
WILL THE SUN AND DAILY MAIL FIGHT BACK?
Burnham’s remarks are likely to intensify scrutiny from newspapers that already have a complicated relationship with his government.
The Daily Mail and The Sun remain influential publications with large digital audiences.
They can continue to investigate government decisions, criticise ministerial policies and challenge the Prime Minister’s public statements.
Burnham cannot prevent newspapers from publishing criticism simply because he chooses not to grant exclusive interviews.
Nor can he assume that communicating directly through TikTok will automatically neutralise negative coverage.
Political accountability requires governments to answer difficult questions, including questions from journalists whose editorial positions they may dislike.
There is an important distinction between refusing to court newspaper proprietors and avoiding legitimate media scrutiny.
The Prime Minister will need to demonstrate that he understands that distinction.
His argument appears to be that he does not need to seek the approval of newspaper commentators.
However, he must still remain accountable to the public through Parliament, independent journalism and other democratic institutions.
That is the real test of his approach.
A NEW POLITICAL ERA OR A DANGEROUS GAMBLE?
Burnham’s strategy reflects a broader transformation in British politics.
The traditional relationship between political leaders and newspaper proprietors is becoming increasingly complicated.
In previous decades, a newspaper’s endorsement could play a significant role in shaping election campaigns.
Today, political messages circulate through multiple platforms, often reaching audiences before traditional newspapers have published their coverage.
This creates opportunities for politicians who want to challenge established media narratives.
But it also creates the danger of political leaders surrounding themselves with supportive audiences and avoiding uncomfortable questions.
Burnham’s confidence in direct communication may prove effective if voters believe he is being more open and accessible.
However, if his social-media strategy becomes a substitute for serious scrutiny, critics will have legitimate reasons to question it.
The Prime Minister must demonstrate that he is changing how politics is communicated without weakening the principles of accountability that make democracy work.
FINAL VERDICT: BURNHAM IS READY TO PLAY BY DIFFERENT RULES
Andy Burnham’s declaration that he is largely unconcerned about what The Sun and Daily Mail think of him represents a significant statement about his political philosophy.
He believes the media landscape has changed and that politicians should no longer behave as though traditional newspaper commentators control the national conversation.
His painful history with The Sun, particularly its coverage of Hillsborough, adds another dimension to his position.
His growing reliance on TikTok and direct communication suggests that he wants to establish a different relationship with voters.
Whether that strategy proves successful remains to be seen.
Traditional newspapers still possess considerable influence, and refusing to court them does not remove the responsibility to answer their questions.
Nevertheless, Burnham has made his position clear.
He does not intend to spend his premiership trying to win the approval of newspaper editors.
Instead, he wants to communicate directly with the public and judge his political success by whether people believe his government is improving their lives.
For his supporters, this represents a welcome rejection of outdated political conventions.
For his critics, it could become a dangerous gamble.
But one thing is certain: Burnham is signalling that his relationship with Britain’s traditional media will be very different from that of many prime ministers who came before him.