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.
RYANAIR HAVE LAUNCHED an aggressive defence of their safety record in the wake of last night’s Dispatches documentary on Channel 4, with CEO Michael O’Leary taking to the radio airwaves this morning to rubbish the claims made.
The programme focused on a survey conducted among a thousand pilots at the airline, which found that more than eight out of ten questioned believe the airline does not have an “open and transparent safety culture”. The survey was commissioned by the Ryanair Pilot Group, which is not recognised by management, but claims to represent more than half of all captains and first officers.
In a number of statements reacting to the programme, Ryanair have highlighted the airline’s “outstanding 29 year safety record”, and this afternoon the Irish Aviation Authority rowed in with its support, saying the programme-makers had carried out a “misguided attack” on the low-cost carrier.
Ryanair have released full details of their correspondence with Blakeway Producations, which made the Dispatches programme. And as you might expect from a company that has regularly hit the headlines as a result of its forthright communications policy, no punches are pulled in its dealing with the producers…
26 July 2013
Blakeway Productions begins its engagement with Ryanair, with a letter informing management that Channel 4 plans to broadcast a documentary outlining pilots’ concerns about safety on 12 August. The three page letter details concerns raised by pilots over working conditions and the amount of fuel they have to carry, amongst other issues.
The response from Ryanair’s Head of Communications Robin Kiely is swift (it’s dated the following Monday), and contains this less-than-conciliatory opening:
Your letter of July 26th was emailed at 17.24hrs on a Friday evening – i.e. after office hours…
Advertisement
Before addressing the core claims contained in the production company’s letter, it’s second paragraph makes counter-claims about Channel 4′s record in the area;
Having previously made false and unsubstantiated allegations against Ryanair (using actors to ‘simulate’ cabin crew) it’s surprising that Dispatches are again inventing false and unsubstantiated claims – presumably again using ‘actors’ – to make what are manifestly false claims.
Kiely then goes on to address 12 individual points raised by the programme-makers. This includes the following passages:
Airline safety is a matter of fact and evidence, it is not something that can be traduced to a subjective “survey” organised by an Aer Lingus pilot union which has repeatedly lied about Ryanair’s safety
These so-called “pilots” you have interviewed have misled you. Ryanair’s fuel policy clearly establishes that the final decretion on fuel lies with each captain.
The five page letter is CC-ed to the Chairman of Channel 4 and OFCOM, amongst others. Four appendixes include a statement from the Department of Transport backing the airline’s safety record and and IAA report on an incident where three flights to Madrid were diverted.
31 July 2013
Blakeway Productions’ respond by saying the company will address the 12 detailed points, but opens by addressing Ryanair’s claims about the previous Dispatches documentary:
I am informed by Channel 4 that despite your allegations about that programme none of your claims were ever the subject of litigation or complaint to the broadcasting regulator Ofcom [...] no actors were used in the broadcast programme.
The letter then goes on to address Ryanair’s offer of an interview with CEO Michael O’Leary, which the airline had said could be whatever length producers wanted, as long as it was unedited:
…as you know it is not an acceptable condition that any interview not be edited. We would have to ensure that any of the interview used in the programme was relevant and was used in accordance with the Ofcom Broadcasting Code which would of course mean, for example, that the content of the interview was fair to third parties.
1 August 2013
No opening paragraph in Kiely’s response this time, just down to business…
1. It is extraordinary that despite the claimed urgency of your 26th July letter, you have failed to address any of the false claims detailed in points 1 – 12 of our 29th July reply, or the absence of any evidence whatsoever to substantiate your heresay and baseless claims. Please now do so by return.
The two-page letter concludes:
Please now provide us by return, with whatever evidence – as opposed to anonymous hearsay – you have to support the 12 claims you made in your July 26th letter which have been comprehensively disproven by the facts set out in our reply of July 29th. Please also confirm if you wish to take up our offer to interview Michael O’Leary who we repeat is perfectly willing to address address any of these false and hearsay claims as long as his answers are not edited by our Channel 4 Dispatches programme which is clearly attempting to yet again smear Ryanair’s 29 year safety record which the IAA has recently confirmed is “on a par with the SAFEST airlines in Europe”.
2 August 2013
Producer/Director Claire Burnett writes:
…I will respond using your numbering :
1. We have noted all that you have said regarding points 1-12 of your letter of 29th July 2013. Your position will be fairly reflected in the programme when it is broadcast.
Point 2 of Burnett’s letter again refers to alleged use of actors on a previous Dispatches documentary (which the producer again rejects), before point 3 again addresses the question of an interview with O’Leary:
We of course would not edit any interview to “suit” a “baseless and inaccurate agenda” as to do so would be in breach of our regulatory Code. However we would retain the right to edit any such interview fairly and accurately. Does Mr O’Leary agree to give an interview on that basis?
Ryanair also sent a letter to the production company on the same date, addressing specific questions relating to the use of Cockpit Voice Recorders.
6 August 2013
In a three-page letter that makes ample use of italics, Kiely’s response to Burnett’s 2 August letter begins in a by-now familiar tone:
It is grossly unfair and of grave concern to us that you have failed to address our specific and categoric responses to each of your “12 points”.
The issue of the O’Leary interview also comes up again, with the airline again insisting it be included unedited:
We cannot rely on assurances of “fairness” or “accuracy” from a TV programme what has produced no evidence whatsoever to back up its false allegations, which are based on anonymous hearsay claims from individuals who despite legal protection refuse to make these unfounded claims on the record.
The letter concludes with the following:
…we continue to reserve all our rights, and put you on notice that the irresponsible broadcast of these allegations could have extremely serious financial and other ramifications for our company, for which we shall be holding you fully accountable.
8 August 213
Burnett’s response contains seven short paragraphs, including the following:
We have offered Mr O’Leary an interview on the same terms offered for example to leading businessmen, politicians and generals on previous Dispatches programmes. We note his unwillingness to be interviewed on these terms.
Your accusations regarding our standards of journalism are rejected in their entirety.
9 August 2013
The producers make the first mention here that the programme will focus on a survey of pilot attitudes, conducted among 1,000 captains and first officers.
We have now had sight of that survey and will be reporting the following within the programme:
More than 8 out of 10 pilots said Ryanair did not have an open and transparent safety culture.
Two thirds of pilots who responded said they did not feel comfortable raising safety related issues through Ryanair’s own internal systems.
Later, the letter states:
We will also report that:
“Ryanair told us their operations were fully compliant with EU requirements; “Airline safety is a matter of fact and evidence, it is not something which can be traduced to a subjective survey.
Pilots should raise concerns through Ryanair’s confidential safety reporting system.”
12 August 2013 (yesterday, the day of the broadcast)
Ryanair aren’t happy:
I refer to your letter dated 9th August, which was received by email at 20.34hrs on Friday evening, long after close of business one working day before your planned broadcast.
It is clear that your programme, having failed to produce one shred of evidence to dispute the IAA’s confirmation that “Ryanair’s safety is on a par with the safest airlines in Europe” is now flailing around trying to concoct spurious claims to support your baseless slur…
The letter goes on to say that the survey results are bogus, and can’t be objective as the body that compiled it doesn’t have access to Ryanair’s 3,000 pilots, and goes on to state:
Your claim that you will “report” that “Ryanair told us their operations were fully compliant with EU requirements” is another example of your inadequate, misleading and biased reporting. It is not Ryanair that have “told you”, but rather the independent EU designated safety regulatory authority for Irish aviation, namely the Irish Aviation Authority, which has publicly confirmed that “Ryanair’s safety is on a par with the safest airlines in Europe”. Your programme MUST report this fact.
Ryanair released the following comment as part of a lengthy statement in the wake of its broadcast:
Ryanair has instructed its lawyers to issue legal proceedings against Channel 4 Dispatches for defamation and Ryanair looks forward to this matter being resolved in the Courts and the safety of Ryanair’s operations being thoroughly vindicated since the IAA has independently confirmed “Ryanair is on a par with the safest airlines in Europe” and the C4 Dispatches programme has produced no shred of evidence to undermine this independent verification of Ryanair’s outstanding safety.
[All images: Screengrabs via Channel 4 Dispatches]
Readers like you are keeping these stories free for everyone...
A mix of advertising and supporting contributions helps keep paywalls away from valuable information like this article.
Over 5,000 readers like you have already stepped up and support us with a monthly payment or a once-off donation.
Very one sided indeed from a British broadcaster who seemed to love mentioning the irish aviation authority alot. Maybe they should do one on easy jet or British airways
Very good point actually. I noticed watching the “documentary” that when o Leary was showing a comparison with may days issued by other carriers, the only other one audibly mentioned was Aer Lingus, despite the fact that BA, Virgin and other British carriers where listed on the white board he was standing next to. The narrator started speaking again before those airlines could be mentioned. Try to beef up the local business by trashing the major player? Seems like it!
I’m a big fan of ryanair a 29 year safety record is hard to argue with, I’m surprised c4 aired that incredibly one sided show 70% of it was about 3 Madrid flights that were diverted to Valencia where while queuing to land they cut in to there 30 min fuel deserve, I have worked in the aviation industry and there are very strict safety rules and regulations and I’m positive that if you sat any pilot down from any airline they could tell you a few stories that would stop you getting on planes for life. And if all of these pilots are so concerned for safety why take off in the first place,if I get in my car and there is not enough fuel for my journey I either put fuel in or don’t go why would a plane be any different. Also on another note thanks to ryanairs constant battle to reduce costs a d fuel being one if an airlines biggest costs, they are trying to use less fuel in turn less emissions. As I say to anyone who complains about Ryan air if you don’t line it pay the extra and fly with someone else if you want it cheap keep your trap shut and play by the rule’s and we will all have a pleasant flight!!
The interviewer gets to ask the questions and should be able to control any interview. Channel 4 should have no problem with an unedited interview. It’s far too easy to edit any interview and turn the interview by a complete 180 degrees. Given the way the programme was transmitted I imagine that no sane CEO would agree to an edited interview. I look forward to the legals on this one.
I’d rather pay the extra few quid to have the excellent service at aer lingus than to travel with Ryanair , the cabin crew have faces like well slapped arses and are completely rude
I’ve had nothing but poor service from Aer Lingus and great service everytime I fly with Ryanair. Suppose it depends on your own experiences but I’ve never seen a staff member with a slapped ass on any Ryanair flight!
In fact, a few months ago two members of my family died and my sister was in a critical condition herself. This all happened a day before my family were due to go to Italy. My father rang Aer Lingus to cancel and change flights to a later date if possible, the response? I quote ‘The family circumstances is not our problem and a charge of 600 will be made’. We’ve written 11 complaints about the comments made and received no reply whatsoever. No problem with a fee because that’s understandable but the way they spoke to grieving man was shocking. Paying the extra money for Aer Lingus isn’t always worth it but hey that’s just my own experience.
Well my next door neighbour had a very different experience he found out he had cancer and they changed his flight to a later date free of charge if he could prove his illness
That’s great for him isn’t it? My father emailed Aer Lingus with the medical reports and doctors notes with no reply to any of his emails and if he calls he’s put on hold for up to an hour. Aer Lingus are no better than Ryanair in my eyes of they can’t even respond to their customers!
It does appear that the program jumped on the populist anti-Ryanair bandwagon and added in a bit of sensationalism. Surely the media would never do such a thing?!? Anyways, I’ve had a few incidents while flying, all of which were with Aerlingus, none with Ryanair, so I’m more biased about them.
I must be a very lucky passenger as I’ve never had any difficulty with any airline Ryanair included. Glad to see Amy that there are some people out there who are independent minded enough to like Ryanair.
I usually prefer flying aerlingus over Ryanair even if I pay a bit more. However I don’t think it’s fair to go on a witch hunt against Ryanair.I would say their safety standard are quite high and they do have a very modern fleet. At the end of the day they’re not Turkish airlines or one of the other never-come-back airlines…
Since 1990 Turkish airlines have lost 7 planes and 148 lives on plane crashes (902 lives lost since 1959). The latest crash was in 2009 with 9 people dead. So no, I will not board a Turkish airlines plane. And to stay on topic; Ryanair have not lost any lives on their flights so far.
There is one irrefutable fact in all of this. Last July, in one day, there were three Mayday calls from Ryanair planes around Valencia airport. Apparently regulations dictate that if remaining fuel reaches a critical level then a Mayday call must be made by the pilot.
Now a Mayday is a call of last resort – there is a serious problem being experienced by the caller. It’s not a mere breach of some obscure regulation; Mayday is made when there is an imminent danger to the aircraft and the lives of its passengers. There is a lesser emergency call, Pan, which can be made if the problem being experienced is less critical – this was not the call that was made on any of those occasions.
I have not seen anywhere Ryanair expressing grave concern about these three incidents. That attitude, I would suggest, does not give me the impression of an airline that “is on a par with the safest in Europe”.
Agree, people seem to be missing the bigger picture that the problem is pilots feel that they can’t report a safety issue for fear of reprimand….that is very serious…whether you like Ryanair or not is beside the point. Ryanair seem to be shifting the focus in order to confuse the issue.
I have noticed that on here, it’s all about an IRISH airline being slammed rather than concerns over the safety of millions. Bet many of those pro-Ryanair on here right now are the usual Ryanair begrudgers
Leo how much additional fuel would you like them to carry? The had sufficient amounts to get them to their destination, circle the airport for an hour, fly an additional 350km to Valencia and circle the airport there before calling in the May Day and they still landed with over 30 mins of fuel in the tank.
LaCaz – it’s nothing to do with defending an Irish company. I’d be of the same opinion if RTE aired a blatantly bullsh!t, one sided program with no factual evidence about a British, American or Spanish company.
Leo, If you actually read the report, you would find that a Pan urgency call was made to Spanish ATC. It was not until closer to the airport that the pilots had to declare a Mayday.
Vincent, from posts on other, related, threads it would seem that the three incidents were down to Spanish ATC keeping the aircraft in holding patterns for far too long. Nothing to do with Ryanair procedures, just the usual trashy broadcaster’s ploy of telling whichever bits of the story suit your purpose.
Leo, do you realise that 2 of the aircraft circled Madrid for over an hour, the other for just under an hour, before they diverted to Valencia , where they were then instructed to circle in yet another holding pattern. On landing 2 of the aircraft had their full 1/2 hour fuel reserve left. How much fuel do you think these aircraft should carry ? The fuelling procedures and regulations which are followed by all airlines remain unchanged since that night but you can bet your life there will be big changes within Spanish air traffic control. You are right that these where very serious incidents, but totally wrong to assume it was the fault of Ryanair and no, I don’t work for them.
I have cancelled all my company flights with Ryanair until this has been sorted. Aer Lingus might be slightly more expensive but you know you are in good hands.
Are Ryanair and Aer Lingus not pretty much the same now anyway. It’s not like you get a free meal from Aer Lingus for paying the extra money. I find Aer Lingus cabin crew are no better than Ryanairs nor any worse.
COOM, I hope you don’t run your business in the same knee-jerk fashion. No, I am not connected to Ryanair other than as a passenger who has flown many hundreds of times with them over the years; both business and pleasure without any safety concerns.
What specific Saftey issues have been highlighted? None.
Disgruntled pilots who are not happy that they have to work up to the 900 hrs per year, some have complained that they have to prepare for a flight outside these hours effectively in their own time, that’s less than 19hr week.
Aerlingus pilots fly 520 hrs per year or 10hrs per week, the average is closer to 900hrs.
Ryanair have the newest fleet of Boeing aircraft of any airline in Europe .
The pilots operate under international and European regulations , I couldn’t care less about Ryanair pilots anonymous survey It didn’t highlight one real incident. I flew on Ryanair yesterday and regularly fly Aerlingus , I prefer Ryanair as they never pander to the awkward customers that can just do what everyone else does. And as for the staff I find them very plesent on both Ryanair and Aerlingus.
I’ve cancelled my one Ryanair flight home from knock to Luton until I am more reassured that I will not die. I know I’ve got two kids waiting anxiously for me to return but isn’t it better for them to know at least Im alive .
Lou, Hopeful C4 Despatches will hold off showing the programme about the giant dragon that’s about to eat Luton. Wouldn’t want you to be alarmed. In the case of Ryanair, what exactly would “reassure” you if their perfect safety record doesn’t ? I’m intrigued.
The British medias’ attack of Ryanair continues – it’s getting blatantly obvious now that they are on a mission to blacken the Ryanair name as best they can on UK soil.
Fair play to MOL and the IAA for standing up to them. We didn’t see a witch hunt program about BAs diastorous safety record on concord did we?
Marie do you believe everything you hear on telly. ? Having said that I would be far more concerned about air traffic control issues than anything else when it comes to flying. You might be wise to cancel but not because of any issues with Ryanair.
Have flower with Ryanair many times and can’t fault them. Sure they might put down the shoe if they are running late but who doesn’t? They preform safety checks on their aircraft twice as often as other airlines to avoid breakdowns which are costly, and as for the comment about them having a face like a slapped arse, I can honestly say on every flight with them the cabin crew have been mighty Craic, and the pilots even joined in over the intercom once or twice!
Well I think if they went into any airline as deep as they go into Ryanair they would find the same cuts and maybe more . Ryanair was if not the first one of the first to ground all flights when the dust cloud was around , Michael is one of the very few people on the planet whom interviewers like to cut their teeth on but they are left floundering watched one on early morning tv best entertainment I had for a long time .
OMG Michael ,about time people new how you have ruined the industry .I know a good few Ryanair pilots they hate you,They all thought Sean Fitzpatrick was brilliant now they have found about you.
Apple's Irish subsidiary incurs $25 billion corporation tax charge as pre-tax profits hit $76 billion
40 mins ago
4.0k
10
evening fix
Here's What Happened Today: Friday
1 hr ago
1.5k
arctic reception
JD Vance says US take over of Greenland ‘makes sense’ during scaled back visit
Updated
1 hr ago
34.6k
105
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 160 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 110 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 142 partners can use this purpose
Use limited data to select advertising 112 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 83 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 83 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 38 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 34 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 133 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 59 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 74 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 83 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 37 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 46 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 27 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 92 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 99 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 72 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 53 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 88 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 69 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