We need your help now
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.
Sign in. It’s quick, free and it’s up to you.
An account is an optional way to support the work we do. Find out more.
By continuing, you are indicating that you accept our Terms of Service and Privacy Policy.
HUNDREDS OF RUSSIANS are facing charges for speaking out against the war in Ukraine since a repressive law was passed last month that outlaws the spread of “false information” about the invasion and disparaging the military.
Among them are a former police officer who discussed Russia’s invasion on the phone, a priest who preached to his congregation about the suffering of Ukrainians and a student who held up a banner with no words, just asterisks.
Human rights groups say the crackdown has led to criminal prosecutions and possible prison sentences for at least 23 people on the “false information” charge, with more than 500 others facing charges of disparaging the military that have either led to hefty fines or are expected to result in them.
“This is a large amount, an unprecedentedly large amount” of cases, said Damir Gainutdinov, head of the Net Freedoms legal aid group focusing on free speech cases, in an interview with The Associated Press.
The Kremlin has sought to control the narrative of the war from the moment its troops rolled into Ukraine.
It called the attack a “special military operation” and increased the pressure on independent Russian media that called it a “war” or an “invasion”, blocking access to many news sites whose coverage deviated from the official line.
Sweeping arrests stifled anti-war protests, turning them from a daily event in large cities like Moscow and St Petersburg into rare occurrences barely attracting any attention.
But reports of police detaining single picketers in different Russian cities come in almost daily and even seemingly benign actions have led to arrests.
A man was detained in Moscow after standing next to a Second World War monument that says Kyiv for the city’s heroic stand against Nazi Germany and holding a copy of Tolstoy’s War and Peace.
Another was reportedly detained for holding up a package of sliced ham from the meat producer Miratorg, with the second half of the name crossed off so it read Mir – peace in Russian.
A law against spreading “fake news” about the war or disparaging the military was passed by parliament in one day and took force immediately, effectively exposing anyone critical of the conflict to fines and prison sentences.
The first publicly known criminal cases over “fakes” targeted public figures like Veronika Belotserkovskaya, a Russian-language cookbook author and popular blogger living abroad, and Alexander Nevzorov, a TV journalist, film director and former politician.
Both were accused of posting “false information” about Russian attacks on civilian infrastructure in Ukraine on their widely followed social media pages, something Moscow has vehemently denied, insisting that Russian forces only hit military targets.
But then the scope of the crackdown expanded, with police seemingly arresting anyone.
Former police officer Sergei Klokov was detained after discussing the war with his friends on the phone.
His wife told the Meduza news site that in casual conversation at home, Klokov, who was born in Irpin near Kyiv and whose father still lived in Ukraine when Russian troops rolled in, condemned the invasion.
He was charged with spreading false information about the Russian armed forces and faces up to 10 years in prison.
St Petersburg artist Sasha Skolichenko also faces up to 10 years in prison on the same charge – she replaced price tags in a supermarket with anti-war flyers.
On Wednesday, a court ordered her into pretrial detention for six weeks.
The Rev Ioann Burdin, a Russian Orthodox priest in a village about 185 miles north-east of Moscow, was fined 35,000 roubles (€390) for “discrediting the Russian armed forces” after posting an anti-war statement on his church’s website and talking to a dozen congregants during a service about the pain he felt over people in Ukraine dying.
He told AP his speech elicited mixed reactions. “One woman made a scene over the fact that I’m talking about [it] when she just came to pray,” he said, adding that he believed it was one of those hearing the sermon who reported him to the police.
Marat Grachev, director of a shop that repairs Apple products in Moscow, he displayed a link to an online petition titled No To War on a screen in the shop.
Many customers expressed support when they saw it, but one elderly man demanded it be taken down, threatening to report him to the authorities.
Police arrived and Grachev was charged with discrediting the military. A court ordered him to pay a fine of 100,000 roubles (€1,112).
Another court ruled against Moscow student Dmitry Reznikov for displaying a blank piece of paper with eight asterisks, which could have been interpreted as standing for No To War in Russian – a popular chant by protesters.
The court found him guilty of discrediting the armed forces and fined him 50,000 roubles (£460) for holding the sign in central Moscow in a mid-March demonstration that lasted only seconds before police detained him.
“It’s the theatre of the absurd,” his lawyer Oleg Filatchev told AP.
A St Petersburg court last week fined Artur Dmitriev for a sign containing president Vladimir Putin’s quote – albeit with a few words omitted for brevity – from last year’s Victory Day parade marking the defeat of Nazi Germany in the Second World War.
“The war brought about so many unbearable challenges, grief and tears, that it’s impossible to forget. There is no forgiveness and justification for those who once again are harbouring aggressive plans,” Putin had said, according to the Kremlin website.
Dmitriev was fined 30,000 roubles (€334) for discrediting the Russian military. That prompted him to post on Facebook: “The phrase by Vladimir Putin, and ergo he himself … are discrediting the goals of the Russian armed forces. From this moment on, (internet and media regulator) Roskomnadzor must block all speeches by Putin, and true patriots – take down his portraits in their offices.”
Net Freedoms said that anything about the military or Ukraine can make a person a target. Even wearing a hat with the blue and gold of the Ukrainian flag or a green ribbon, considered a symbol of peace, have been found to discredit the military, the group said.
The Rev Burdin said the publicity about his case spread his message far beyond the dozen or so people who initially heard his sermon – the opposite of what the authorities presumably intended by fining him.
“It’s impossible to call it anything other than the providence of God,” the priest added. “The words that I said reached a much larger number of people.”
Well maybe for a start have some proper analysis. Analysis on the qualifications, experience and years service in a company.
In every company I have worked for, you negotiate your pay on a personal basis and not what is or is not between your legs.
People who go the extra mile, put In longer hours etc are going to progress better than those that don’t. Those that take significant time off are going to be negatively effected.
In many sectors especially tech areas, you will be behind after missing a week or 2, let alone months or years. Plus the time to catch up is a big factor.
@Da Dell: are you saying that women who have children shouldn’t be given equal pay to men with the same experience? I mean if you want to go backwards, away you go…
@Hairy Teeth: I think that what @Da Dell is saying is that generally the people at the top of an organisation are those that have put in long hours in order to get to the top – they have made personal sacrifices to do this and it is not a matter of whichever sex they are. Are you suggesting that someone who makes the “Choice” to take time off or do reduced hours should also be at the top of an organisation purely because of their sex.
@Hairy Teeth: No im not saying that, im saying that those either men or women, that have the same qualifications, experience and time served should be on the same.
@Da Dell: what a novel thought. It’s mad that, in the current climate, that’s actually considered as being an unfair perspective. Current social viewpoint…. Men bad, women good …
@lorcmulv: yes exactly, My partner and myself decided not to have children a long while back, for a multitude of reasons, I have what I consider a v good salary and my partner is on more. She along with myself hate quotas and this gender pay malarkey. She has got where she is by putting in the long hrs and going over and above every time. She will say she got to her position on her own volition and hard work, not due to quotas.
@Da Dell: yes, why they don’t do proper analysis about why some people can afford to put in longer hours (=can focus 100% on their career) and why some people can’t afford it because they are burdened by a portfolio of activities/duties that are not career related. I am sure that would bring some interesting insight.
@Daniela Monza: putting in longer hours or having more years experience doesn’t necessarily make you better at the job, getting results is what makes you better. Just because a woman leaves at 5 every day and has 2 years less experience doesn’t mean she won’t be better at the job than someone who works till 9 every day with more experience. In fact she could be much better at the job because of different perspectives she brings. We need to value what actually brings results which will make things fairer and better for all.
@Da Dell: couple of points to note about diversity in the work place.
1. Putting in longer hours does not mean you are better at your job. In fact it could be argued that you are worse as you can’t manage your time efficiently.
2. A good employer respects a person’s work life balance and mental health so if their employees are having to do regular long hours they are failing as an employer.
3. Gender balance in the workplace produces unbiased products environments and services, the tech industry recognised this a long time ago and have come on leaps and bounds to encourage gender balance.
4. If the only reason the pay gap exists is due to family raring this can easily be resolved by giving men equal rights of the opportunity to share the family care.
5. Lots of women are successful and raise children at the same time it requires a support network at home and in work to achieve this perhaps your partner was missing one of these supports so to achieve her career goals she had to sacrifice something. It doesn’t have to be that way but of course its also perfectly fine to choose not to have children but to say she is only successful because she doesn’t have kids is kinda derogatory don’t you think?
6.Women often have their careers or second careers in the second half of their life when they return to work after their kids have grown a bit. Unfortunately there are very little financial supports to allow home carers re-educate themselves. I’ve just been through the system it’s hard. If I was on the dole for a year I can get back to education but if I raised my kids for 10 years I cant get any support except susi if my partners income is low enough . A person who takes a career break to raise a family needs to retrain or refresh before returning to the workplace to go back on a decent wage. This can lead to higher incomes and validate the higher pay and in turn close the gender pay gap. Instead what happens is women return to the workforce in lower paid jobs because they can afford childcare and educational fees on one income while they study. P.s we need parents to spend some time raising their families, it makes for a better society in the future.
7. We need people to have children for societies future and we need women in board rooms and high end jobs. This entire discussion is about finding a way to achieve that.
8. So finally the gender paygap exists which you at least agree with. So instead of saying welll I’m alright Jack my wife earns more than me , other people are thankfully a little more open minded and innovative to realised that it’s not as simple as saying you must pay both genders equally ( because we know that doesnt fix the whole problem) we must take a holistic approach to employment and lifestyle and make tweaks here and there in work and society to create equal opportunities. For the record I also don’t agree with gender quotas it’s lazy , ignorant and uninventive.
Side note if your wife/ partner had to take extended leave to care for you after an accident /illness or nurse an elderly parent would she think it fair that she missed out on a pay rise or promotion that she’d spent 10 years working her a$$ off for.
@Da Dell: everybody who is out for a while don’t have the same experience as someone who is present all the time.
This account for all genders.
@Da Dell: yet women are supposed to rare a family, and fight for equal status. Or put off having kids, for their career sakes. Women bring different things to the table, and that should be acknowledged. They also have to endure inappropriate comments, and sometimes bullying from their male counterparts.the fact that you instantly referred to physical anatomy proves we have a long way to go.
@Colette Byrne: women are not “Supposed to rare a family” have you forgotten “Our body, Our Choice” and yes women do bring a lot to the table and this is why we already have laws on equal pay, status and anti-bullying. The physical anatomy that you mention is a choice used by women to legally take a break from employment to facilitate this choice. This is something that men cannot do thereby creating an inequality in the workplace.
There is no gender pay gap but there is an earnings gap. You don’t need any self-serving academics to explain it. All you have to do is look at the world around you. In the vast majority of households the male partner still carries primary responsibility for earning the household income. This is a voluntary choice made by both parties and is equally acceptable to both parties. If they really want to end the earnings gap they will have to deny women the choice of staying at home, working part-time while their
husbands/ partners earn the household income and insist that women step up and accept equal responsibility for earning money for their households. Choice is the reason for the earnings gap. But you can’t let something as inconvenient as truth derail the latest feminist grave train. It’s financially more rewarding to perpetuate the myth that there is a gender pay gap caused by the mythical patriarchy and get lots of taxpayers money to fix it. It’s like getting paid to scratch an itch in a wooden leg.
@frank mcglynn: Spot on.
@frank mcglynn:One of the best comments I’ve seen in a while
I’ll plaguarise it shamelessly
@frank mcglynn: https://www.irishtimes.com/news/young-women-likely-to-be-main-breadwinner-1.10654
I think you’ll find that your view is archaic.
@Jacqueline berry: No it is not. What I have stated above is the reality of the world we live in. Men are still the main breadwinners though more women may now be taking on the responsibility they are still the minority.
@frank mcglynn: I agree, I know of very few, if any, households when the woman is the primary breadwinner and the man takes primary responsibility for the home. This is s choice that people make but results in women being more likely to be content as the second income. When termtime (?) was introduced into the public service it was mostly women who took the summer off unpaid to stay at home with the children. Likewise when job sharing was introduced and shorted working weeks it tended to be women who worked shorter hours to mind children. I am not saying this is right or wrong but rather a statement of fact, based upon my direct experience, that some chose to ignore. I do think things are changing though …
@frank mcglynn: sure, they should also insist that men accept equal responsibility for minding children, elderly parents, the house, organising healthcare for the whole family, etc. It’s surprising how a lot of men still don’t have a clue about how much unpaid work is involved in that. Maybe because they never bothered to do it?
@frank mcglynn: 100% correct the person enabling the high earner by providing free housekeeping, child care and possibly elderly care. But if you take a closer look at the academic studies they do comparisons of people fresh out of college, singletons and conclude there is an earnings gap…….
@Sarah Gannon: Yes, that is the point, there is an earnings gap. The factor in these studies is largely the hours being worked, and nothing to do with gender.
@frank mcglynn:
Step up choice??? Women are primary care givers, many men don’t want that pressure either, but because of societal norms they feel they have to compete in work.
Women juggle home life with work life. You underestimate their worth. Women unlike their male counterparts are very good at multi tasking.
We are still trying to sort out the unjust marriage bar. Where just because a woman got married she wasn’t entitled to go out and work. No pension rights for all the years they worked.
And also more women have higher education but its not reflected in their wages.
Well I earned more than wife because there was no paid incentive for me to stay at home with our children when they were born. As such, I was in a position to work overtime, and she wasn’t. We are both on same pay
if women get payed less wouldn’t more businesses just employ women
@Ter: Yes why, especially the ruthless ones constantly trying to get employee cost down, if it was true they would have mostly women employees.
@Da Dell: like retail and hospitality
They say a womans work is never done – that’s probably why they get paid less :)
@Mark Malone: careful now, Mark :)
@Colleen: Only joking :) :)
Meaningless statistics. Pay gap must compare salaries for same job based on gender.
@Don Hogan: No, they should compare the same two people working the same hours at the same job, if they’re paid the same, which the law demands, there’s no pay gap.
In an imaginary company with a number of managers and engineers, most of whom are male, the average hourly salary may be €36. Those in the assembly department, most of whom are female are paid an average of €17 per hour. By this calculation there’s gender pay gap, however it doesn’t take into account the reality that those engineers are qualified up to masters level. They studied and worked hard to get their qualifications and their salaries should reflect this. The staff in assembly are treated very well, for many it’s a second income, they work flexible hours and both male and female staff are paid alike.
A symptom not a cause they said. Addressing the fact that women are more likely to go into childcare etc. Equality is not forcing genders into each others natural roles just so you can say its 50/50 across the board. I’m not sure why people have become so obsessed with that.
Gender equality is not equality of outcome.
Gender equality is freedom of opportunity and choice.
If a woman wants to go into child care knowing she will earn less than maybe an engineer, that is OK. As long as they have the choice then who cares. Can we just leave people gravitate to what they want to do naturally. Slightly off topic from the pay gap but that stuff annoys me when people start on about getting genders into different jobs just for equality when they miss the actual point of equality.
Women who are better at their jobs would help
Ok, you can go to sleep now. Just make sure to wash your face and brush your teeth. Ill come read you ben and Jerry soon.
@Jacqueline berry: you’ll come and read me ice cream? No equal pay for you anytime soon Jacqui
Write it onto law. Why should females be paid less for the same work. And those putting it down to “staying how with the kids” or “bad pay negotiation skills” are way off the mark, its this mindset that contributes to a gender pay gap.
@Jacqueline berry: into*
@Jacqueline berry: Show me a pay gap and we can discuss it. You need to look at individual cases. Didn’t a radio presenter quit because they were upset that their male counterparts were paid more, but they came out and demonstrated the formula didn’t take gender into account, it looked mostly at qualifications and experience, and she was lacking compared to her former colleagues.
Ireland is a very fair and equal country when it comes to genders. I have yet to see any cases where any difference was due to gender. If anybody can show a difference that is based solely on gender, we should fight it together.
@Jacqueline berry: it is written into law. As are all the different ways women are supported professionally as primary care givers, job share, shorter working week, maternity leave paid and unpaid. Make it easily available for both parents and hey presto, you’ve closed the gap massively
@Jacqueline berry: Maybe read the article, they covered your ‘equal pay’ comment, which has been enshrined in law since the 70s.
You are way off the mark, any person with 10 yrs experience is going to be on more pay than a newbie, its that mindset that contributes to thinking there is a gender pay gap.
And as many people say, if you don’t like your job, skill up and get something better, don’t be expecting it to be handed to you.
@Jacqueline berry: you are right in in saying that females doing the same job with the amount of time doing it and the same results should be paid the same as males – no one can argue with that but your comment “staying at home with the kids” is not employment related and also means that they are not doing the same hours – these surveys do not take into account that it is primarily females that take such time off and so are not doing the same hours or productivity in the workplace as those that don’t make the choice to take time off.
@Da Dell: when did I say i was expecting anything to be handed to me? I expect equal pay of equal work, but unfortunately this is not always the case for woman. There is a pay gap, not always, but it does exist. Don’t assume I expect anything to be handed to me. I’m currently in 2nd year of an engineering degree so I can “get something better” as you say. I’m also a mother.
@Ger Mooney: that one example that fits your narrative. She me hard evidence, data based, from ireland that shows the lack of a gender pay gap. And don’t include the usual “she’s on maternity leave” “not as qualified” etc. If she does the same job she’s as qualified as he is.
@lorcmulv: you cannot use maternity leave to explain a pay gap. Plenty of fathers now also take maternity leave. So every woman in the workplace is a mother, and no men are fathers based on this logic
@Jacqueline berry: Do men get the same paid time off for paternity leave?
@Jacqueline berry: For example at a low level, I hire a man/woman to work in a warehouse on minimum wage. Fast forward 3 years and they have been rewarded for their loyalty and work ethic and now is on 1.5 times minimum wage. The warehouse is busy and we need and warehouse worker. I higher a man/woman on 1.5 times minimum wage because of equality. My 3 year member of staff hears this and is disgusted. Wants more money because ‘it’s not fair’. It can’t be afforded. They leave the warehouse, I’m down a perfect employee. The new hire doesnt like the job and leaves after 6 months. Equality has greatly upset my business. Equality isnt perfect. Pros and cons every which way.
@Jacqueline berry: Narrative? My narrative is clear that I will support anybody who received less than someone else doing the same job based on their gender. I also never mentioned and wouldn’t mention maternity leave, as I support maternity and paternity leave absolutely. So give over speaking for me please.
I am telling you that you cannot find one case where the difference in pay is based on gender. If there was, it would be illegal. The burden of proof is on the people who keep dragging up this nonsense. It is illegal to pay someone less based on gender, this gap being quoted is a skewing of figures which is not honest, and which suits agendas of focus groups who profit from the division of the genders.
No, if someone does the same job as someone else, they are not as qualified. Qualification comes from meeting certain standards, whether educational or skill based assessment, by a body or institution. Do you read stuff back before you post it? Genuinely?
Tell you what, give me even an anecdotal example in Ireland where someone would get paid less based on their gender and we will have a look at it. I am not saying I can explain it away, I will genuinely look at it and do some research.
@Jacqueline berry: The gender pay gap is a false concept.
If a survey takes 1000 civil servants, 500 men and 500 women, all on the same grade and paid the same. The finding is no gender pay gap. If 100 of those decide to use the shorter working year which means a chunk of unpaid time off or a reduction in weekly salary across all 52 weeks. 80 are women 20 are men. Now there is a gap in the average wage of the 1000, with the women slightly lower as there are more on the shorter working year option. So it is a meaningless statistic because even within this group everyone is still paid the same for the same job.
@Jacqueline berry: As the article clearly states it’s already enshrined in legislation since the mid-70s that men and women must be paid equally. We have to ask therefore why this rate isn’t calculated, the statistic is there, it’s available and illegal to deviate from it. Instead they chose a bizarre calculation guaranteed to give a desired outcome.
@Jacqueline berry: it IS written into law. Since the 1970s.
In 1975 Icelandic women went on strike to show how important they were to the economy and in protest at the gender pay gap. A year later the Icelandic government passed a law guaranteeing equal pay.
@Eamonn Connaghan: One year earlier Ireland passed a law making sex based pay rates illegal and providing equal pay for equal work and also work of equal value.
“It’s fair to point out the flaws in the statistics. The median gap is calculated by lining up all men’s and women’s wages from top to bottom, and comparing the number that falls in the middle for each gender. As with all averages, it smooths out nuances and doesn’t account for differences in specific job roles, age, or previous experience”. This is a quote from a guardian article dubunking myths about the pay gap… That quote alone highlights why the statistics cannot be taken in anyway seriously.
Sorry is this the NAI meeting ?…. NeanderthAls Asssociation of Ireland.
@Sonia Fitzpatrick: there’s some amount of them on the journal to be fair. I always read the comments just to remember why we need feminism in the first place.
Such bitter men. A dying breed I think. Most of the neanderthals are over 50…..hope for the future.
@Sonia Fitzpatrick: They’ll be out of the workplace and on a pension soon. There is a god.
@Sonia Fitzpatrick: You mean those sad people who come on here and indulge in name calling because they lack the intelligence to discuss issues on their merits.
@frank mcglynn: No Frank I don’t mean that at all.
@Fiona O’ Dwyer: Yes Fiona I agree, very defensive and aggressive for supposedly a social issue (unequal pay) that does’nt exist.
@Sonia Fitzpatrick: So you come on to a comment section where people discuss issues, you cry against a gender pay gap that does not exist and then precede to generalise that the male commentators as being Neanderthal. Do you not see the hypocrisy in that?
As with your fellow sleeptalker Jaceuline Berry, you have put no evidence forward, not a shred, none of you have, not one case where the reason for a different rate of pay was gender.
I again point to another case, the American women’s soccer team. They fought long and hard to get to the negotiating table, and what happened? After being offered the same terms as the men’s team, they refused, and why? Because the majority of their members felt it was more beneficial to keep the contract they already had. That was a choice, which is nearly always the case when you look at skewed figures.
I think most people in here, whether male or female, or however you identify, that we all want equality. I wouldn’t sit by while a female colleague got paid less for the same work, and this is an important point, if all things are equal. Experience, qualifications, hours worked, they are usually the deciding factors at play, and they don’t only go in one direction, it works the same way for everybody.
@Sonia Fitzpatrick: Interesting comment coming from the person who refers to those who she disagrees with as ‘Neanderthals’.
@frank mcglynn: Thank you Frank.
@Ger Mooney: ‘To cry on here’ ? Im not crying. In the next few years these cavemen attitudes will be a thing of the past. The Pay Transparency Bill 2019 will ensure companies are transparent about their pay. It will become such a social movement that companies will comply. As staff will choose to work for equal pay companies. A brighter future for everyone as all genders will be valued equally for their educational, experience and what they contribute to their employers.
@Sonia Fitzpatrick: What in anything I said was caveman? Review what I said and point out anything that you classify as caveman. You cannot discuss or debate, all you do is throw out inane statements and seemingly sit back and feel great about yourself. You add no value to anything here.
You cannot even give a anecdotal example of any inequality. We already have equality, the problem is some people want more for less and wear victim badges proudly, because it is easier than accepting the truth.
@Ger Mooney: did you even read the article?
@Sonia Fitzpatrick: that’s the problem. They’re scared. They know they’re a dying breed.
While we argue about equal pay, low cost hubs and automation are taking our jobs. In 10 years this problem won’t exist in the west.
My missus makes more than me and I’m happy takes the pressure off things a bit.
Most of the tech companies use a salary system, based on how you perform in your role. So starters get the same basic salary, regardless of gender, age or whatever. After a year, there will be a review on how you performed and a decision on a pay rise is done. If a man was better performing than a woman, he might get a higher salary than her from then. Or vice versa. If a woman was in that role for a few years, she will earn more than a male starter. Or a tenured man more than a female starter. Aldi and Lidl have automated raises, after a certain amount of time in your job. Personally I think that it is fair to get paid like this, as it takes the experience into account. I bet that those agreements are not taken into those statistics.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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).
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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).
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.
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).
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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).
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.
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