A State of Fear: How the UK government weaponised fear during the Covid-19 pandemic by Laura Dodsworth (feel good novels .TXT) 📕

transmissible or deadly. On 16 December the government performed a U-turn and changed the rules for Christmas, reducing the number of households that could meet from three to two.

Pennington confessed he thought the new variant had become ‘a very handy excuse for cancelling Christmas as rates were rising – in fact it is extremely hard to prove transmissibility without infecting people with the virus, which would be unethical.’

If the Kentish Covid variant was indeed used to justify changing the rules for Christmas, this is an example of ‘placebic information’, another behavioural psychology tool. New strains provide a psychological justification for actions the government may wish to take anyway. Worryingly, the virus will always mutate and produce new variants, which can justify action before the new variants are fully understood. A government could keep new variant bait and switch policies going for as long as there are viruses. That’s forever, by the way.

U-turns were typical during the epidemic. This can be very reasonably explained and justified by the twists and turns of following the science during a new epidemic. But uncertainty is also a form of bamboozlement and is akin to the tactics used in psychological warfare. On 5 November 2020, Boris Johnson said, ‘These rules will expire on 2 December,’ about the second lockdown. But on 16 November, Matt Hancock said, ‘It’s too early to say.’ This flip-flopping and good cop, bad cop routine was a feature of the government messaging.

I talked to the UK’s leading disaster and recovery specialist, Lucy Easthope. She’s a senior lecturer on disaster recovery and mass fatalities and has advised the government on Covid-19, as well as Grenfell, the Salisbury Novichok poisoning and the Manchester bombing. She told me ‘this is some of the worst psychological torture I have seen. Christmas is on, it’s off, it’s on. It’s not unusual in disaster recovery to go back and forth. In disaster recovery we say the kindest thing you can do is make one decision early. The government are making one of the big classic disaster recovery mistakes.’

It’s not possible to know whether there was a lack of coordination between ministers, a lack of planning, or a deliberate plan to confuse. Regardless, it had the effect of creating a level of uncertainty which was bad for business and bad for mental health. We house some of the most advanced behavioural science in the world in our government – surely the comparison to psychological torture would not be missed? The lack of certainty about lockdown finish lines could arguably be said to create a more stressed and therefore compliant population. It is probably reasonable to assume the UK government’s Covid U-turns were due at different times to both a lack of planning and psychological manipulation.

On 11 February 2020, Matt Hancock said that ‘the clinical advice about the risk to the public has not changed and remains moderate’.33 Of course, we all know about the U-turn that followed on 23 March. Did he and the government respond to the ‘science’, but also to public opinion, polling and media pressure?

SOME OF THE WORST DOOM-MONGERING ADS

We have endured a year of fear thanks to the government’s Covid advertising campaign. Extreme, visceral and deliberately frightening TV, radio, poster and print advertising were designed to elevate your sense of threat and risk and encourage obedience to the rules.

Using fear in advertising is controversial because it can be distressing and harmful. The Advertising Standards Authority states in its Advertising Codes that advertising must minimise the risk of causing harm or serious or widespread offence. There are specific guidelines regarding fear:

‘4.2. Marketing communications must not cause fear or distress without justifiable reason; if it can be justified, the fear or distress should not be excessive. Marketers must not use a shocking claim or image merely to attract attention.’34

Some of the government’s advertising is flagrantly in breach of the ASA code, as you will see in some of the worst doom-mongering ads I noted throughout the year.

Sociologist Dr Ashley Frawley conducted a brief semiotic analysis of the government’s advertising and described its trajectory to me: ‘The first hard-hitting campaign showed yellow and red caution tape and a healthcare worker in a mask which looks like a gas mask. This is trying to tell you that this is very serious indeed. There is a horror movie dystopian quality to it. In another campaign they used a raspy, stern male voice, telling you, “people will die!” By the summer the advertising is using a woman’s voice, the tone is upbeat, there’s whistling, you’re being told to enjoy summer. Then in September, October, we were back to a more stern actor, signalling the tension and the risk are building again. It’s like an abusive relationship – uh-oh something is about to happen. In January, the stern, raspy voice man is back.’

As Frawley said, a dominant tactic of the campaign was not just to say that you are at risk, but more importantly, you are a risk. It is dark messaging indeed to tell us we are responsible for killing other people, including our loved ones.

‘George left the pub… and went home to kill his dad.

Sasha had a great night out at her friend’s house… and popped in to kill her nan on the way home.

Once Ade’s finished keeping fit… he’ll go home to kill his mum over dinner.

Stop.

Horrified? Of course.

But would you feel different if their weapon of choice was Covid-19?

Coronavirus is killing people every day.

Not adhering to public health guidelines is a principal cause of the spread of Coronavirus.

Covid kills. And you don’t have to have symptoms to spread it.

Protect the lives of friends, family, neighbours, and the community.

Don’t bring Covid home this Christmas.’

This is the wording from a sensationalised video35 produced for social media and shared by a councillor at Haringey Council.

‘Someone jogging, walking their dog or working out in the park is highly likely to have Covid-19. This is a national health emergency. Around one in three people have no symptoms and are spreading it without