Support from readers like you keeps The Journal open.
You are visiting us because we have something you value. Independent, unbiased news that tells the truth. Advertising revenue goes some way to support our mission, but this year it has not been enough.
If you've seen value in our reporting, please contribute what you can, so we can continue to produce accurate and meaningful journalism. For everyone who needs it.
WITH THE CITIZEN’S Assembly already beginning its work, debate about the 8th Amendment and abortion continues.
Last weekend at mass, Seán Lynch came across a leaflet by Yes to Life, a project of the pro-life Life Institute, and one FactCheck reader asked us to take a look at it.
We obliged. This is our fact check of 19 selected claims from the leaflet, which the Life Institute told us has been printed about 120,000 times.
1. “The 8th Amendment…was approved by a huge majority of the Irish people in 1983″.
Referendum on the Eighth Amendment of the Constitution, 7 September 1983 (page 36).
Total Electorate: 2,358,651
Votes Cast: 1,265,994
Turnout: 56.7%
Votes for: 841,233
Votes against: 416,136
Margin (as a percentage of votes): 33.58%
Margin (as a percentage of the electorate): 18.02%
The 8th Amendment was clearly approved in 1983, and by a majority of those who voted (66.45%), but not by a majority of the electorate (those who could have voted), due to the turnout of 56.7%.
However, there is a certain degree of licence here to use “the Irish people”, when what you technically mean is “those who voted”. This loose shorthand is commonly (though wrongly) used.
After all, only two referendums have ever been passed or defeated by a majority of the electorate – to join the European Community in 1972 (58.6%), and to ratify the Good Friday Agreement in 1998 (52.5%).
But was it a “huge” majority of those who voted? Of course it’s hard to precisely define “huge”, but let’s put it in context.
We calculated margins of victory/defeat in all 40 Irish referendums since 1937, based on votes as a percentage of all votes, and votes as a percentage of the electorate.
The referendum to introduce the 8th Amendment was passed by the 16th-biggest margin in terms of votes cast, and the 15th-biggest margin in terms of the total electorate (out of 40 referendums).
That’s above average, but not by much.
Taking into account the imprecision of using “the Irish people” rather than the “Irish electorate”, and the fact that, actually, the margin of victory for the 8th Amendment was only a bit above average, we rate this claim Half TRUE.
(You can download a spreadsheet with referendum results since 1937, here).
2. ”Since 2001, the number of Irish women travelling abroad for abortion has fallen by 45%”
UK government statistics show that in 2001, some 6,673 women travelled to England and Wales for an abortion (pg 39). In 2014, that was 3,735 – a decline of 44%.
In 2015, the figure was 3,451 – representing a 48% fall since 2001. (pg 71) A relatively small number of women travel to the Netherlands each year (16 in 2014), but data is not available for 2001.
Data is not available for Scotland.
Based on the best information available, we rate the claim Mostly TRUE
3. ”In Britain, 20% of all babies have their lives ended by abortion”
In 2015, there were 697,852 live births in England and Wales, 3,147 still births, and 191,014 abortions (pg 23).
This means there were 892,013 pregnancies in total, 21.4% of which ended in abortion.
In Scotland, there were 55,098 live births, 211 still births, and 12,082 abortions (pg 6). So out of a total of 67,391 pregnancies, 17.9% ended in abortion.
In Great Britain as a whole (England, Wales and Scotland), there were 203,096 abortions out of 959,404 pregnancies – a rate of 21.1%.
However, miscarriages are not taken into account in these figures. The NHS and the HSE both estimate that 1 in 6 pregnancies end in miscarriage but as this can only be an estimate, it is impossible to definitively calculate the percentage of overall pregnancies that end in abortion.
The claim is UNPROVEN.*
4. “In Ireland our abortion rate is 5%…”
According to the CSO, in 2014 the number of live births in Ireland was 67,295, and the number of still births was 164. (2014 is the most recent year for which figures on still births are available).
Calculating the number of terminations among women living in Ireland is trickier. We know that at least 3,735 travelled to England and Wales in 2014, and 16 travelled to the Netherlands.
However, no good data is available for the number of pregnancies which end in medical termination by way of abortion pills delivered to women resident in Ireland.
Furthermore, it is widely thought that when Irish-resident women travel abroad for terminations, some do not give their real, Irish home address, which is what the UK Department of Health uses as the basis of its calculations.
So the figure available – 3,751 abortions in England, Wales and the Netherlands – should be seen as the absolute minimum, with the actual number being higher.
If we add the number of live births, still births, and registered abortions, we get 71,210 known pregnancies in Ireland in 2014 – 5.3% of which are known to have ended in abortion.
This is the source of the figure presented in the leaflet. However, the gap in our knowledge – the number of medical abortions – is potentially quite significant, and therefore we rate this claim UNPROVEN.
5. “It’s estimated that 250,000 Irish people are alive today because abortion wasn’t available in Ireland”
Calculate the abortion rate in Ireland and in Britain every year since 1984, the year after the 8th Amendment was implemented
Assume abortion became legal in 1984, and apply the British abortion rate to the number of pregnancies in Ireland every year
All other things being equal, this yields the number of abortions that would have occurred in Ireland without the ban on abortion
The difference between this number, and the number of abortions actually undergone by Irish women in England and Wales is, according to the rubric, the number of abortions prevented by the 8th Amendment and the abortion ban
That number is 270,520
The first thing to note here is that this is, fundamentally, a counter-factual claim, meaning a claim based on an assumption that past events went differently (i.e. abortion was legalised in 1984).
FactCheck stays away from such claims, as they are essentially impossible to prove, and indeed, we rate this claim UNPROVEN.
However, since the claim is included in a larger document we’re looking at, it’s worth pointing out that there a couple of problems with the analysis, beyond its counterfactual nature.
All counter-factuals are based on assumptions, but some assumptions are more reasonable than others.
Firstly, it cannot be assumed that without the 8th Amendment, abortion would have been legalised in 1984. There was no legislation proposed, and no groundswell of public support for a loosening of abortion laws, at that time.
Abortion was already illegal in Ireland in 1983, but the right to life of the unborn had not been enshrined in the Constitution, which is what the 8th Amendment did.
There is no factual basis for a reasonable assumption that without the 8th Amendment, abortion would instantly have been legalised.
(In its counterfactual, the Pro Life Campaign somewhat more modestly allows a 10-year lag, assuming that abortion would have been legalised in 1994).
Secondly, it cannot be assumed that without the 8th Amendment, abortion would have been legalised to the extent it is legal in the UK (i.e. for any reason up to 24 weeks, under stricter conditions after that point).
Thirdly, it cannot be assumed that the abortion rate in Ireland would have been identical to that of Britain’s, and certainly not immediately, in the first year of legalisation.
The UK legalised abortion in 1967, and so by 1984, there had been 17 years of “bedding in” of the systems, administration, infrastructure, not to mention recruitment of healthcare personnel, involved in this.
So it cannot reasonably be assumed that Ireland’s abortion rate would instantly have hit the same level as that of Britain’s, although of course, we don’t know.
Furthermore, social and cultural differences – in particular the unique role of the Catholic church in Ireland – also mean it cannot reasonably be assumed that Ireland’s abortion rate would have been on a par with Britain’s.
Fourthly, as we have already explained, the statistical basis of Ireland’s “abortion rate” is shaky. It is likely it has been higher (perhaps significantly higher) since 1984 than is reflected in official figures.
Therefore the difference between actual abortions and abortions under a British-style regime (the “lives saved”) could well be smaller than is assumed in this analysis.
6. “When abortion was banned in Ireland, we were one of the safest places in the world to have a baby, according to the United Nations. Our maternal mortality rate…was amongst the lowest in the world”.
This was the subject of a FactCheck article back in August, which you can read in full here.
Since 1985, Ireland has consistently had one of the lowest rates of maternal death in the world, hovering around joint 6th in the global rankings.
So the claim is TRUE. However – it has to be emphasised that this very low maternal mortality rate has continued unchanged since the limited legalisation of abortion in Ireland in 2013.
So it is entirely unnecessary to preface the claim (as the leaflet does) with “When abortion was banned in Ireland”.
Ireland’s ranking in terms of maternal mortality is the same now that abortion is not entirely banned, as it was when it was.
7. “It’s estimated that 90% of parents in Ireland continue with their pregnancy following a life-limiting diagnosis”
The source cited for this in the leaflet is a 2013 Irish Independent column written by Niamh Ui Bhriain, herself a spokesperson for the Life Institute.
In it, she writes “In 2011 there were 36 abortions carried out [in Britain] on Irish women for these conditions [fatal foetal abnormalities]“.
The Life Institute sent FactCheck figures provided by the UK government in response to a Freedom of Information request.
Those figures show that in 2011, Irish-resident women had 51 abortions on the grounds of serious foetal abnormality, in England and Wales. Ui Bhriain excluded non-fatal conditions like Down’s Syndrome and spina bifida from this, and arrived at the figure of 36.
The Life Institute also cited a 2012 Irish Times report entitled ’Although we have a pro-life identity, we do not have the healthcare that supports parents and newborn babies who have complex needs’.
The article cited research by Dr Joan Lalor of Trinity College Dublin, which found that about 740 pregnancies a year involve diagnoses of severe foetal abnormalities, and about 10% of those pregnancies end in abortion.
These are not definitive numbers, though, and there is no official source of data on the number of pre-birth diagnoses of severe abnormalities.
However, it is certainly TRUE that one estimate puts the percentage ending in abortion at 10%, as reflected in the claim.
8. “Recent studies show that abortion in [fatal foetal abnormality] cases can cause huge trauma for mothers…”
The leaflet cites one study here - this one, from 2013.
That research tracked levels of grief, trauma and depression in women and men after a decision to either terminate or continue with a pregnancy involving anencephaly, a foetal abnormality which involves the absence of a significant portion of the brain or skull.
Advertisement
In short, it found that women who chose to terminate their pregnancy rather than continue it, experienced a higher level of grief, despair, avoidance, and overall depression, and concluded:
There appears to be a psychological benefit to women to continue the pregnancy following a lethal fetal diagnosis.
Once again, the use of “huge” in the claim is somewhat subjective, but fundamentally this is a fair reflection of the findings of the study in question.
It compared the psychological test results of three groups of women after a specific event.
That is: two weeks, six months, and 14 months after 1) the termination of a late pregnancy (second or third trimester) due to foetal anomalies, 2) a preterm (premature) birth of a VLBW (very low birth-weight) child, and 3) the birth of a healthy child.
It found that the rate of diagnosis of a psychiatric disorder was consistently higher among the first group, at every time interval, although the vast majority of women in all three groups did not have such diagnoses.
However, the paper does not compare between women choosing to terminate a pregnancy after a diagnosis of foetal abnormalities, and women choosing not to terminate a pregnancy after a diagnosis of foetal abnormalities.
So the study does not state that the choice to terminate the pregnancy (as opposed simply to the sheer presence of fatal foetal abnormalities) is what caused the increased rate of psychiatric order.
The evidence in this area is mixed, so we rate this claim Half TRUE.
9. “Women who had abortions were 30% more likely to experience mental disorder, according to a major study…”
The source cited in the leaflet is this 2008 study, which involved extensive psychological testing on a cohort of women in New Zealand, over the course of 30 years.
It compared the prevalence of mental health problems (depression, anxiety, suicidal ideation, alcohol and drug dependence) among women who had never been pregnant, with four groups:
Women who had had an abortion
Women who had experienced pregnancy loss
Women who had had a negative reaction to their pregnancy, and gave birth
Women who had had no negative reaction to their pregnancy, and gave birth.
It also took into account the possible role of various external factors like socioeconomic status, pre-existing mental health problems, academic achievement, employment problems, relationship problems.
In the end, the study found:
Women who had had an abortion were 1.37 times (37%) more likely to have mental health problems than women who had not been pregnant, and after five years, 1.32 times (32%) more likely
Women who had experienced pregnancy loss were 25% more likely, and after five years, 1.06 times 6% more likely
Women who had had a negative reaction to their pregnancy, and gave birth, were 11% more likely, and after five years, 5% more likely
Women who had had no negative reaction to their pregnancy, and gave birth, were 7% less likely to have mental health problems, but after five years, 22% more likely.
So the claim in the leaflet (“Women who had abortions were 30% more likely to experience mental disorder”) actually slightly understates what the study says.
As a statement about that specific study, we rate it TRUE.
However, it should not be taken as comprehensive of all research into the psychological effects of abortion, which has been very mixed, with severalstudies finding no increased likelihood of mental health problems stemming from abortion, or that most women who undergo an abortion do not regret their decision.
10. “The suicide rate for women who had abortions was 6 times higher than for women who had given birth, according to a 13-year study”
The leaflet cites this 2005 study, which tracked deaths and injuries among various groups of women in Finland between 1987 and 2000.
In short, it found that the rate of suicide among women who had had an abortion in the previous year was 33.8 per 100,000 pregnancies - 6.15 times higher than that of women who had given birth (5.5 suicides per 100,000 pregnancies).
However, after the introduction of new care guidelines in Finland in 2001, a follow-up study by the same author in 2015 found that the suicide rate among women who had had an abortion in the previous 12 months had fallen by 24%.
We don’t have more updated figures for the suicide rate among women who gave birth, so we can’t say how these two cohorts compare now.
Secondly, it’s important to note that this study does not find that abortion causes the increased suicide rate.
The author, Mika Gissler, in an earlier study on the same issue, wrote:
The relation between suicide, mental disorders, life events, social class, and social support is a complex one. Abortion might mean a selection of women at higher risk for suicide because of reasons like depression.
Another explanation for the higher suicide rate after an abortion could be low social class, low social support, and previous life events or that abortion is chosen by women who are at higher risk for suicide because of other reasons.
However, he added that a causal link was possible:
Increased risk for a suicide after an induced abortion can, besides indicating common risk factors for both, result from a negative effect of induced abortion on mental wellbeing.
The situation in Britain
Many of the claims made in this section actually refer specifically to England and Wales (rather than Britain), but where possible, we have found evidence relating to Scotland as well.
11. “Up to 200,000 abortions every year”
In 2015, there were 191,014 abortions in England and Wales (pg 23), and 12,082 in Scotland (pg 6). In Britain, therefore, there were 203,096.
The claim is TRUE.
12. “90% of babies with Down Syndrome aborted”
These are the basic facts, from the 2013 report of the National Down Syndrome Cytogenic Register for England and Wales:
There were 1,232 pre-birth Down Syndrome diagnoses in 2013
75% (925) ended in termination; 6.7% (82) ended in live birth; 1.6% (20) ended in foetal death; the outcome was unknown in 16.6% of cases (205)
Of the cases whose outcome was known,90% ended in termination.
Evidence was not available for Scotland. Given this gap in our knowledge, and the fact that the 90% figure refers only to known outcomes – where there is a prenatal diagnosis of Down Syndrome, rather than all outcomes, the claim is FALSE.
The leaflet did not contain the context that 90% is the figure in the case where a prenatal diagnosis of Down Syndrome has been made. The percentage of pregnancies with the potential to result in a baby being born with Down Syndrome in England and Wales would be 57%.
13. “Abortion up to birth where the baby has a disability”
Continuing the pregnancy would pose a greater risk to the physical or mental health of a woman that terminating it
The termination is necessary to prevent serious, permanent harm to the physical or mental health of the woman
There is a “substantial risk” that if the child was born, it would be seriously physically or mentally handicapped
While there is no precise legal definition of “substantial risk” or “serious handicap”, and these determinations are left to two qualified doctors, it’s clear that not just any disability is, in practice, accepted as a grounds for termination after 24 weeks.
Some of the foetal diagnoses involved includes: spina bifida, anencephaly, microcephaly, Down’s Syndrome (pg 33).
And it is also relatively extremely rare. In 2015, 230 abortions took place in the UK after 24 weeks (6 months), on the basis of a substantial risk of serious disability in the foetus.
That’s 0.12% of the total 185,824 terminations among women resident in England and Wales.
Some 52 terminations took place after 32 weeks (in the ninth month), the latest gestational age band specified. That’s 0.03% of all terminations among residents of England and Wales last year.
The phenomenon described in the claim (“Abortion up to birth where the baby has a disability”) is extremely rare, and the disability involved is required to be deemed “serious” by two medical professionals.
However, it is allowed under British law, and does take place. We rate the claim Mostly TRUE.
14. “Babies that survive abortion simply being left to die. (66 in 2008 alone)”
As evidence, the Life Institute cited the Confidential Maternal Deaths Enquiry’s 2007 report on perinatal mortality in England, Wales and Northern Ireland.
The year referred to was 2005 and not 2008.
The report states (pg 28) that of the 2,235 neonatal deaths (deaths of newborns) in England and Wales that year, 66 came after an abortion. That is, a termination was performed, but the child was born showing signs of life.
The report points out that in most of the 66 cases, there had been a diagnosis of congenital abnormality, and that the newborns died on average after 55-66 minutes.
It should also be pointed out that the phenomenon of neonatal death after an abortion is extremely rare.
In 2005, there were 194,300 abortions in England and Wales. There were 66 neonatal deaths after an abortion – that’s 0.03% of cases.
There is no evidence in the report that these newborns were “simply left to die” – i.e. that medical professionals were negligent or indifferent toward their survival, after they were born.
For this reason, we rate the claim Mostly FALSE.
15. “37% were repeat abortions in 2014″
Figures taken from the UK Department of Health, and NHS Scotland, for 2014:
Abortions by residents of England and Wales, and in Scotland: 196,046
Abortions by women who had previously had one or more abortions: 72,606
37.03% were repeat abortions
Using the same figures and method, 35.5% were repeat abortions in 2015.
The claim is TRUE.
Europe
16. “In Spain the abortion rate is also at 20%”
In 2014, the most recent year we have data for, there were 94,796 abortions in Spain, according to the country’s Department of Health.
That’s a total of 522,446 pregnancies, 18.1% of which ended in abortion - BUT again the ‘total’ number of pregnancies does not include those which end in miscarriage.
That’s a total of 1,047,791 pregnancies, 21.9% of which ended in abortion – BUT again the ‘total’ number of pregnancies does not include those which end in miscarriage.
The claim is UNPROVEN.*
18. “In Sweden 41% of all abortions are repeat abortions”
* These verdicts have been updated from Mostly TRUE to UNPROVEN to take into account that it was not originally noted in this factcheck that miscarriages had not been counted in the calculations for these three countries.
TheJournal.ie’s FactCheck is a signatory to the International Fact-Checking Network’s Code of Principles. You can read it here.
For information on how FactCheck works, what the verdicts mean, and how you can take part, check out our Reader’s Guide here.
Readers like you are keeping these stories free for everyone...
It is vital that we surface facts from noise. Articles like this one brings you clarity, transparency and balance so you can make well-informed decisions.
We set up FactCheck in 2016 to proactively expose false or misleading information, but to continue to deliver on this mission we need your support.
Over 5,000 readers like you support us. If you can, please consider setting up a monthly payment or making a once-off donation to keep news free to everyone.
FactCheck
The Journal's monthly FactCheck newsletter keeps you in the loop about what misinformation trends Ireland is experiencing - and how we're fighting back. Sign up here
Not sure if it’s just me, but I avoid taxis as much as possible coming home from a night out. I live a 15 min drive from Cork city, and back when hackney cabs could be booked to pick you up at a certain time/place, I knew the cost was exactly €20 to get home every time, and was happy to pay it. The fares for taxis just varies way too much, and is inevitably more expensive. I’ve genuinely paid anywhere between €26-€39 on the meter for the exact same trip, and I can’t figure out how the price can fluctuate so much, which makes me think I’m getting ripped off in some cases. Much rather not drink and just drive or else have a lift organised from the other half.
@Chris Tee: totally agree its getting prohibitively expensive 2 taxis to my house in and out of town 34 quid thats 7 pints of the black stuff in my local.
The increase in fare is most likely going to turn customers away. My understanding behind the hesitancy of night work is the added risk of danger from theft and the chance the taxi will be soiled leaving it unusable were also part of the equasion
@Seamus Quaide: due to cost of inflation everything is going up and what kind of wealthy knowledge your getting when u pay them ?
You are looking your wealth of knowledge on wrong place.
@Peter Jo: There seems to be a limit to the knowledge of economics in all these scenarios. The answer is always to throw money at it rather than address the root causes.
Not enough houses being built? Give money to developers no matter what the cost. Cost of living increasing? Increase minimum wage. People drink too much? Up the price of booze. People not using enough (mostly non existent) public transport? Up the cost of fuel.
@Don Hogan: see Don, I’m not an economist but I’d say maybe some kind of better public transport and policing, stricter pub licensing (in the U.K., if you’re too drunk, you’re refused drink service, that’s the norm- in ireland, you’re allowed to buy drink til you black out, vomit and punch someone), maybe even on a larger scale- spread employment across the cities and not just Dublin to reduce the outrageous demand on all services in Dublin.
@Stacey Boylan: I’ve heard several horror stories from taxi drivers regarding the foul behaviour from people at night. Verbal abuse, defacation in the cars, urinating, vomiting and physical threats along with people refusing to pay. I wouldn’t work those hours for anything. It’s simply not worth it. I don’t blame your Dad one bit for deciding not to work at night and I’m sorry he had such awful experiences.
@Stacey Boylan: 100% agree. It’s extremely unsafe, unsociable hours. Just like everyone else during Covid taxi drivers also realised life is about more than chasing money, it is important to have some sort of quality of life. Unsociable hours are unhealthy, and dangerous. For the amount of money and exploitative company like Freenow what is the point? Why would anyone work those hours? My partner has been attacked, harassed, got his car damaged, puked in etc. At occasions women were indecent in the back of his car, he got her out, she didn’t pay but said she will accuse him of all sorts. Does anyone get how terrifying is that to a decent person? Getting accused of things, just because he picked up a drunk tart? One got sick in his car, (well known RTE personel) and spewed abuse at him for an hour. The list goes on. He’s a decent fella, calm and collected but coming home from late shifts he has developed anxiety. Everyone who is so judgemental about Taxi drivers and taking only cash fares and all the other vile stuff they think of them should remember, they are also people, they work with the public, and not all of them are exploitative,dirty,unprofessional etc..
Would be nice if there could be more understanding and kindness and less of stereotyping people here.
How much more do we pay for a litre of fuel a pint or a steak compared to 5 years ago. These guys are absorbing all these increases & worth it. As regards night time would you like to work with the risks that are there now at night . Many friends of mine have been robbed , abused , spat at & damage to their cars. I wouldnt do it
Enticed people to stay in. You can get a taxi on mainland Europe for a third of the price. Ireland is increasingly becoming a country that is too expensive for every day living. Public transport is a disaster and now taxis up their price. TAXXXI….!
12% pay hike and they’re still unhappy, nobody absolutely nobody else will get a 12% hike in pay. Before the bleating starts everybody’s fuel and cost of living has risen not just the taxi drivers…. 28k my eye, they earn more than that and most pay a nominal few quid tax… Few genuine ones rest cowboys
Pope Francis had 'peaceful' night in hospital, Vatican says
1 hr ago
4.6k
7 deadly reads
Sitdown Sunday: 'How f**king twisted is that?' - James Murdoch on his relationship with his father
28 mins ago
1.7k
3
Mulhouse
One dead and several police officers wounded in 'Islamist' knife attack in France
Updated
15 hrs ago
36.0k
Your Cookies. Your Choice.
Cookies help provide our news service while also enabling the advertising needed to fund this work.
We categorise cookies as Necessary, Performance (used to analyse the site performance) and Targeting (used to target advertising which helps us keep this service free).
We and our 152 partners store and access personal data, like browsing data or unique identifiers, on your device. Selecting Accept All enables tracking technologies to support the purposes shown under we and our partners process data to provide. If trackers are disabled, some content and ads you see may not be as relevant to you. You can resurface this menu to change your choices or withdraw consent at any time by clicking the Cookie Preferences link on the bottom of the webpage .Your choices will have effect within our Website. For more details, refer to our Privacy Policy.
We and our vendors process data for the following purposes:
Use precise geolocation data. Actively scan device characteristics for identification. Store and/or access information on a device. Personalised advertising and content, advertising and content measurement, audience research and services development.
Cookies Preference Centre
We process your data to deliver content or advertisements and measure the delivery of such content or advertisements to extract insights about our website. We share this information with our partners on the basis of consent. You may exercise your right to consent, based on a specific purpose below or at a partner level in the link under each purpose. Some vendors may process your data based on their legitimate interests, which does not require your consent. You cannot object to tracking technologies placed to ensure security, prevent fraud, fix errors, or deliver and present advertising and content, and precise geolocation data and active scanning of device characteristics for identification may be used to support this purpose. This exception does not apply to targeted advertising. These choices will be signaled to our vendors participating in the Transparency and Consent Framework.
Manage Consent Preferences
Necessary Cookies
Always Active
These cookies are necessary for the website to function and cannot be switched off in our systems. They are usually only set in response to actions made by you which amount to a request for services, such as setting your privacy preferences, logging in or filling in forms. You can set your browser to block or alert you about these cookies, but some parts of the site will not then work.
Targeting Cookies
These cookies may be set through our site by our advertising partners. They may be used by those companies to build a profile of your interests and show you relevant adverts on other sites. They do not store directly personal information, but are based on uniquely identifying your browser and internet device. If you do not allow these cookies, you will experience less targeted advertising.
Functional Cookies
These cookies enable the website to provide enhanced functionality and personalisation. They may be set by us or by third party providers whose services we have added to our pages. If you do not allow these cookies then these services may not function properly.
Performance Cookies
These cookies allow us to count visits and traffic sources so we can measure and improve the performance of our site. They help us to know which pages are the most and least popular and see how visitors move around the site. All information these cookies collect is aggregated and therefore anonymous. If you do not allow these cookies we will not be able to monitor our performance.
Store and/or access information on a device 104 partners can use this purpose
Cookies, device or similar online identifiers (e.g. login-based identifiers, randomly assigned identifiers, network based identifiers) together with other information (e.g. browser type and information, language, screen size, supported technologies etc.) can be stored or read on your device to recognise it each time it connects to an app or to a website, for one or several of the purposes presented here.
Personalised advertising and content, advertising and content measurement, audience research and services development 136 partners can use this purpose
Use limited data to select advertising 106 partners can use this purpose
Advertising presented to you on this service can be based on limited data, such as the website or app you are using, your non-precise location, your device type or which content you are (or have been) interacting with (for example, to limit the number of times an ad is presented to you).
Create profiles for personalised advertising 78 partners can use this purpose
Information about your activity on this service (such as forms you submit, content you look at) can be stored and combined with other information about you (for example, information from your previous activity on this service and other websites or apps) or similar users. This is then used to build or improve a profile about you (that might include possible interests and personal aspects). Your profile can be used (also later) to present advertising that appears more relevant based on your possible interests by this and other entities.
Use profiles to select personalised advertising 77 partners can use this purpose
Advertising presented to you on this service can be based on your advertising profiles, which can reflect your activity on this service or other websites or apps (like the forms you submit, content you look at), possible interests and personal aspects.
Create profiles to personalise content 37 partners can use this purpose
Information about your activity on this service (for instance, forms you submit, non-advertising content you look at) can be stored and combined with other information about you (such as your previous activity on this service or other websites or apps) or similar users. This is then used to build or improve a profile about you (which might for example include possible interests and personal aspects). Your profile can be used (also later) to present content that appears more relevant based on your possible interests, such as by adapting the order in which content is shown to you, so that it is even easier for you to find content that matches your interests.
Use profiles to select personalised content 33 partners can use this purpose
Content presented to you on this service can be based on your content personalisation profiles, which can reflect your activity on this or other services (for instance, the forms you submit, content you look at), possible interests and personal aspects. This can for example be used to adapt the order in which content is shown to you, so that it is even easier for you to find (non-advertising) content that matches your interests.
Measure advertising performance 127 partners can use this purpose
Information regarding which advertising is presented to you and how you interact with it can be used to determine how well an advert has worked for you or other users and whether the goals of the advertising were reached. For instance, whether you saw an ad, whether you clicked on it, whether it led you to buy a product or visit a website, etc. This is very helpful to understand the relevance of advertising campaigns.
Measure content performance 60 partners can use this purpose
Information regarding which content is presented to you and how you interact with it can be used to determine whether the (non-advertising) content e.g. reached its intended audience and matched your interests. For instance, whether you read an article, watch a video, listen to a podcast or look at a product description, how long you spent on this service and the web pages you visit etc. This is very helpful to understand the relevance of (non-advertising) content that is shown to you.
Understand audiences through statistics or combinations of data from different sources 75 partners can use this purpose
Reports can be generated based on the combination of data sets (like user profiles, statistics, market research, analytics data) regarding your interactions and those of other users with advertising or (non-advertising) content to identify common characteristics (for instance, to determine which target audiences are more receptive to an ad campaign or to certain contents).
Develop and improve services 82 partners can use this purpose
Information about your activity on this service, such as your interaction with ads or content, can be very helpful to improve products and services and to build new products and services based on user interactions, the type of audience, etc. This specific purpose does not include the development or improvement of user profiles and identifiers.
Use limited data to select content 38 partners can use this purpose
Content presented to you on this service can be based on limited data, such as the website or app you are using, your non-precise location, your device type, or which content you are (or have been) interacting with (for example, to limit the number of times a video or an article is presented to you).
Use precise geolocation data 43 partners can use this special feature
With your acceptance, your precise location (within a radius of less than 500 metres) may be used in support of the purposes explained in this notice.
Actively scan device characteristics for identification 25 partners can use this special feature
With your acceptance, certain characteristics specific to your device might be requested and used to distinguish it from other devices (such as the installed fonts or plugins, the resolution of your screen) in support of the purposes explained in this notice.
Ensure security, prevent and detect fraud, and fix errors 86 partners can use this special purpose
Always Active
Your data can be used to monitor for and prevent unusual and possibly fraudulent activity (for example, regarding advertising, ad clicks by bots), and ensure systems and processes work properly and securely. It can also be used to correct any problems you, the publisher or the advertiser may encounter in the delivery of content and ads and in your interaction with them.
Deliver and present advertising and content 96 partners can use this special purpose
Always Active
Certain information (like an IP address or device capabilities) is used to ensure the technical compatibility of the content or advertising, and to facilitate the transmission of the content or ad to your device.
Match and combine data from other data sources 68 partners can use this feature
Always Active
Information about your activity on this service may be matched and combined with other information relating to you and originating from various sources (for instance your activity on a separate online service, your use of a loyalty card in-store, or your answers to a survey), in support of the purposes explained in this notice.
Link different devices 50 partners can use this feature
Always Active
In support of the purposes explained in this notice, your device might be considered as likely linked to other devices that belong to you or your household (for instance because you are logged in to the same service on both your phone and your computer, or because you may use the same Internet connection on both devices).
Identify devices based on information transmitted automatically 84 partners can use this feature
Always Active
Your device might be distinguished from other devices based on information it automatically sends when accessing the Internet (for instance, the IP address of your Internet connection or the type of browser you are using) in support of the purposes exposed in this notice.
Save and communicate privacy choices 64 partners can use this special purpose
Always Active
The choices you make regarding the purposes and entities listed in this notice are saved and made available to those entities in the form of digital signals (such as a string of characters). This is necessary in order to enable both this service and those entities to respect such choices.
have your say