| Kindle Price: | $6.99 |
| Sold by: | Amazon.com Services LLC |
Your Memberships & Subscriptions
Download the free Kindle app and start reading Kindle books instantly on your smartphone, tablet, or computer - no Kindle device required.
Read instantly on your browser with Kindle for Web.
Using your mobile phone camera - scan the code below and download the Kindle app.
Follow the author
OK
A State of Fear: How the UK government weaponised fear during the Covid-19 pandemic Kindle Edition
Explore your book, then jump right back to where you left off with Page Flip.
View high quality images that let you zoom in to take a closer look.
Enjoy features only possible in digital – start reading right away, carry your library with you, adjust the font, create shareable notes and highlights, and more.
Discover additional details about the events, people, and places in your book, with Wikipedia integration.
But why did the government deliberately frighten us, and how has this affected us as individuals and as a country? Who is involved in the decision-making that affects our lives? How are behavioural science and nudge theory being used to subliminally manipulate us? How does the media leverage fear? What are the real risks to our wellbeing?
Ahead of any official inquiry into the handling of the Covid-19 pandemic, Laura Dodsworth explores all these questions and more, in a nuanced and thought-provoking discussion of an extraordinary year in British life and politics. With stories from members of the general public who were impacted by fear, anxiety and isolation, and revealing interviews with psychologists, politicians, scientists, lawyers, Whitehall advisers and journalists, A State of Fear calls for a more hopeful, transparent and effective democracy.
- LanguageEnglish
- Publication dateMay 17, 2021
- File size1453 KB
Customers who bought this item also bought
There is a word for only sharing information which is biased and is used to promote a political cause: propaganda.Highlighted by 262 Kindle readers
Effectively, nothing is so permanent as a temporary government measure.Highlighted by 253 Kindle readers
From the first night we were told to lock down I realised I was more frightened of authoritarianism than death, and more repulsed by manipulation than illness.Highlighted by 241 Kindle readers
Editorial Reviews
Review
Review
About the Author
Product details
- ASIN : B08ZSYN14J
- Publisher : Pinter & Martin; 1st edition (May 17, 2021)
- Publication date : May 17, 2021
- Language : English
- File size : 1453 KB
- Text-to-Speech : Enabled
- Screen Reader : Supported
- Enhanced typesetting : Enabled
- X-Ray : Enabled
- Word Wise : Enabled
- Print length : 320 pages
- Best Sellers Rank: #786,881 in Kindle Store (See Top 100 in Kindle Store)
- #2,069 in Political Science (Kindle Store)
- #4,212 in Medical General Psychology
- #10,422 in Counseling & Psychology
- Customer Reviews:
About the author

Laura Dodsworth is an author, journalist, photographer and commentator and has been described as a ‘latter-day punchy Cassandra’ and a ‘Slayer of Taboos’. She is the author of the two instant Sunday Times Bestsellers, 'Free Your Mind: The new world of manipulation and how to resist it' (2023) and 'A State of Fear: How the UK government weaponised fear during the Covid-19 pandemic’ (2021). Her previous books 'Bare Reality: 100 women, their breasts, their stories', 'Manhood: The Bare Reality' and 'Womanhood: The Bare Reality' attracted worldwide media coverage and excellent reviews. Laura and the creation of 'Womanhood' were the subject of a documentary for Channel 4, '100 Vaginas', which received 5 star reviews and has been broadcast around the world.
Customer reviews
Customer Reviews, including Product Star Ratings help customers to learn more about the product and decide whether it is the right product for them.
To calculate the overall star rating and percentage breakdown by star, we don’t use a simple average. Instead, our system considers things like how recent a review is and if the reviewer bought the item on Amazon. It also analyzed reviews to verify trustworthiness.
Learn more how customers reviews work on AmazonCustomers say
Customers find the book well-written, compelling, and easy to read. They appreciate the depth of research and ample references. Readers also say the process of fear mongering is well-developed and laid out.
AI-generated from the text of customer reviews
Customers find the book well-written, compelling, and easy to read. They say it's an excellent work on a tough subject.
"...Very deeply researched. Easy to read and extensively annotated.Excellent work on a tough subject." Read more
"...Compelling reading!" Read more
"...The process of fear mongering is very well developed and laid out...." Read more
"This was such a well written book about the first year of Covid-19 pandemic in the UK and the use of fear as a tool by the government." Read more
Customers find the book very deeply researched, informative, and illuminating. They say it's detailed and has ample references.
"...Very deeply researched. Easy to read and extensively annotated.Excellent work on a tough subject." Read more
"...Detailed and with ample references." Read more
"Great book and research..." Read more
-
Top reviews
Top reviews from the United States
There was a problem filtering reviews right now. Please try again later.
Very deeply researched. Easy to read and extensively annotated.
Excellent work on a tough subject.
Laura Dodsworth is a voice in the wilderness, confronting the nonsensical scare tactics being employed about Covid, designed to keep us all cowering behind our sofas.
Compelling reading!
Top reviews from other countries
A desire to stimulate necessary debate, albeit inevitably toxic at times, is Dodsworth’s avowed intention, but she admits, sensibly, that “rational argument is only possible if the emotionality of a situation does not exceed a critical degree.” Dodsworth does an admirable job of demonstrating, with reference to some plum examples, just how far that “critical degree” of emotionality was exceeded during the COVID era.
A recurrent “Leitmotif” throughout the book is that of disproportionality in the government’s handling of COVID-19. Here Dodsworth shows that she has done her research thoroughly ; this book is not just a series of references to Wikipedia entries. She quotes in support of her criticisms the head of a self-harm research group at Nottinghamshire University, who slammed as “repugnant” the memorable “Don’t let a coffee cost lives” mantra. Most of us would not have known of the existence of such a research group. Dodsworth is clearly media-savvy, homing in on the power of the video, as against the written word, to frighten us into compliance with state directives. A video produced by Haringey council, advising that jogging alone in your local park WOULD (not might) spread the disease is singled out for particularly heavy criticism. Even under the most severe lockdown regimes, leaving your home for up to an hour a day to exercise in your local area was permitted!
Dodsworth doesn’t always see the wider picture in her criticism of the Johnson administration of the handling of COVID-19. She is rather quick to apply the label “autocratic thinking in disguise” to Matt Hancock’s previously expressed view that provision of services by the state to the people is a two-way street and that people have to take their share of responsibility, yet complains later about the lack of priority given to personal responsibility in the government’s narratives. So she laments the lack of priority given to something which she had previously slammed as “autocratic.” Is this not a little muddled? Was it not objectively reasonable to expect from individuals a degree of personal responsibility, in terms of not putting themselves needlessly in positions in which they could easily infect others, or become infected themselves? Whilst one can make an objective case for not making universal COVID vaccination compulsory (and Dodsworth does so very well), was it not incumbent on individuals to consider the choice to vaccinate very carefully, having regard to their own personal circumstances?
But to be fair, Dodsworth does provide solutions rather than merely heaping criticism on the government. For instance, she advocates, and provides credible evidence for, a targeted approach to vaccinations, albeit not mandatory ones, for over-50s and specific vulnerable categories. This, she says, would have eliminated 98% of the death risk and 85% of the serious illness risk associated with COVID, whilst not endangering the lives of those whose immune systems cannot handle the vaccine. A true anti-vaxxer would not offer such a measured viewpoint.
The most significant take-away from this book is the breathtaking double standards of the “zero-risk brigade,” those who want, among other things, zero road casualties, zero carbon emissions and, of course zero COVID, and who want them now, at zero cost to society, but only so long as they don’t affect their pet causes. Dodsworth criticises Sadiq Khan, the London mayor, for declaring solidarity with the Black Lives Matter protests just a week after branding anti-lockdown protests as “irresponsible.” She also mentions the truly frightening prospect of future climate change lockdowns, which make the COVID lockdowns seem very reasonable. These were mentioned at the 2022 G7 summit, to which many senior politicians were transported in pollution-generating aircraft. Kudos to Dodsworth for not glossing over such hypocrisy. She advocates “a little scepticism” towards the motives of those who rule us when they claim to have our best interests at heart, an excellent example of her skill in treading the middle path. Many would say that she was understating the point and that a lot of scepticism was advised. Conversely, a small minority of vaccine-obsessed hardliners would probably accuse her of inciting insurrection against the state. But Dodsworth is very adept at picking the right sources to support her position. She refers to Michael Gove, a prominent member of Johnson’s COVID-era cabinet, admitting to a likely extreme reluctance of government to hand back powers granted under emergency legislation once the causative emergency had passed. Getting your opponents to make your own case is always a good tactic ; Dodsworth employs it to good effect.
If A STATE OF FEAR were written as a thesis for a master’s degree in public health studies, Dodsworth would justifiably graduate with distinction and be a worthy candidate for the office of secretary of state for health. Not only has she undertaken her research in as constructive a manner as one could hope, she has generated an end product that is as balanced as one could ever expect a book about such an emotive topic to be. It deserves a five-star rating.
"The perceived level of personal threat needs to be increased among those who are complacent, using hard-hitting emotional messaging."
This book sets out to ask whether it was ethical or wise to deliberately frighten the population into compliance & whether that response was proportional to the actual threat and to discern the unintended consequences of that approach. When you look back on it, did any of us really think we needed government whether we could sit next to anyone on a park bench or visit our loved ones in their place of residence? Did any of us anticipate that healthy people would not be permitted to spend time with dying family members in order to "protect" them?
Laura Dodsworth has done sterling work in analysing the extensive fear-mongering and manipulation of the past 18 months. I see the effects of that with many of the people I know. People who are astonished to learn that the excess deaths are not the worst since the war but are less than several years in this century, people who believe that the death rate from Covid is nearly 10%! I've watched with dismay as elderly people in my village, living alone, have cut themselves off from society because they see perfectly healthy people as vectors of infection & disease. I've seen their astonishment when I explain that we have had three deaths with Covid since August in the entire district (covering half a county!). They don't believe it even when I show them the information on the government's own website.
I thought I had heard it all (one of my neighbours is so terrified that she still disinfects her shopping and has a shower after visiting the supermarket) but it was heart-breaking to read in the book about a chap with terminal cancer who drove to hospital rather than walk "because I didn't think I should breathe in air that other people were breathing out." On his return to his home he stripped off in his conservatory because he didn't want to contaminate the house & threw his shoes away before scrubbing himself in a hot shower. He may be an extreme case, but the government should hang its head in shame that in his last months was reduced to a sense of abject terror.
Dodsworth is scathing about the complicity of the media in all this - no challenge to the ridiculous videos of people collapsing in the street in China, no analysis of statistics or attempt to put the data in context. Likewise no attempt to hold Neil Ferguson to account or question his predictions of half a million deaths given his track record of being seriously wrong about previous disease outbreaks. It has to be said, some medics haven't covered themselves with glory - I was horrified to read that the BBC's breakfast doctor, Sarah Jarvis, had actually said on air "Breathing is an offensive weapon if you are infected with Covid."
Dodsworth did speak to members of SPI-B, although it is telling that two felt they could only be fully open about their views if they were anonymous. They were concerned about creeping authoritarianism and that the lack of nuance might cause people to disbelieve government messaging in future times of crisis. Another said the use of fear had been "dystopian" and "ethically questionable". Another was "stunned by the weaponisation of behavioural psychology". Meanwhile the head of the Self-Harm Research Group at Nottingham University decried the 'Don't Kill Granny' message and its impact on vulnerable children. Some researchers are allegedly too frightened to speak out, to question the narrative, for fear of loss of job or even career. Other eminent scientists have either been vilified or just removed from the discussion.
She highlights that the choice of metrics and information promoted to the public maintains the sense of fear - for example constantly talking about cases & hospital admissions without mentioning most of those in hospital go home alive, or what the term 'Covid death' really means, or how much Covid was contracted not in the community but in hospitals & nursing homes (such information is not easy to get even though government websites are replete with detailed statistics). Overall, the impression is that figures are being chosen to support the government's line, rather than the approach being determined by the statistics. The selective use of data was even commented on by the UK Statistics Authority. Meanwhile social media is removing articles/videos etc as misleading or as spreading disinformation (having a Nobel prize or being a Professor at one of our most prestigious universities & an acknowledged expert in the field will not help you). Yet there is clear bias as the likes of Ferguson, who has been serially wrong by large margins (!), is still reported. This is combined with a failure to explain just why the information is misleading, to allow people to read for themselves. This has meant that some heavyweight scientists have been largely eliminated from public debate, often categorised as conspiracy theorists.
The consequences of all this have been horrendous. Evidence shows people dying at home, presumably too frightened to go to hospital, soaring cancer waiting lists with the inevitable consequences, the disruption to children's education. And here we are again with under 50 cases of the new Omicron variant and we're back in masks and some are suggesting a second Christmas be curtailed. In other countries, vaccines are being mandated and some here are calling for this. The civil liberties implications are serious. And this wrought by a campaign of fear that has persuaded many people to willingly accept the erosion of their liberties in order to "protect" them and ensure their "safety". And, as Dodsworth indicates, no-one has got a plan for reversing the impact of the fear tactics. Dodsworth also highlighted the absence of Parliamentary scrutiny -since she wrote the book our MPs could not be bothered to vote on the extension of the Coronavirus Act until March. So much for democracy, so much for civil liberties.





