That's mere conjecture based on Sinophobia. The majority of new cases are returning nationals.
?Calling a spade a spade, isn't Sinophobic.
?
Misusing language is not helpful.
You have confused how the people of a nation are perceived rather than the perpetrators of the cause.
However, in this case there continues to be a stream of poorly informed posts related to very different issues from those you nominate. Even for example well demonstrated by you not knowing that Swine Flu became a pandemic due to woeful US prevention strategies: China was not in the picture.
There were no conventions for naming pandemics back then, so the name stuck."Spanish Flu" is still ok is it ?
From what I have read, it has a HIV component and as far as I know there is no vaccine for that.Note that Australia's chief medical officer has stated there may never be a vaccine for the Corona virus!
Just think about that for a moment!
Not much you posted was credible.Yeah right.
Of course Australia acted promptly to counter early Sinophobia that led to local Chinese been mistreated and their businesses shunned.Details: African traders and students say they have faced racial widespread discrimination, including being evicted from apartments and forced to sleep on the streets, after five Nigerians who frequented a Guangzhou restaurant tested positive for the coronavirus.
China wanted it named Mexican flu.There were no conventions for naming pandemics back then, so the name stuck.
If you asked someone where H1N1 originated you would probably get the wrong answer. I asked 3 people before posting - they weren't sure.
Then I asked them if they knew where the swine flu originated, and they quickly said "China" instead of Mexico.
Local officials from China’s key Northeast region have reportedly admitted that they faked economic data over the past few years when the real numbers were much lower.
Several officials have said they’ve significantly overstated data ranging from fiscal revenue and household income to GDP, and that this was a reason why the drop in the figures appears to have been so dramatic this year, reported China Daily while citing further reports from China’s state-run Xinhua News Agency.
Barron’s re-created the regression analysis of total deaths caused by the virus, which first emerged in the central Chinese city of Wuhan at the end of last year, and found similarly high variance. We ran it by Melody Goodman, associate professor of biostatistics at New York University’s School of Global Public Health.
“I have never in my years seen an r-squared of 0.99,” Goodman says. “As a statistician, it makes me question the data.”
Real human data are never perfectly predictive when it comes to something like an epidemic, Goodman says, since there are countless ways that a person could come into contact with the virus.
For context, Goodman says a “really good” r-squared, in terms of public health data, would be a 0.7. “Anything like 0.99,” she said, “would make me think that someone is simulating data. It would mean you already know what is going to happen.”
There’s one scenario where the data could be understandably jiggered, Goodman said. Because there are privacy concerns around public health data, it’s conceivable that someone would simulate the data based on real data, so as to make the individuals unidentifiable. But even then, the r-squared in this case is extraordinarily high. Moreover, says Goodman, when data are manipulated to protect privacy, it would need to be disclosed; there is no such disclosure on the WHO site.
According to a new report by cybersecurity firm Recorded Future, Chinese authorities have directed two abrupt shifts in the English language media it produces. The first shift skirted facts about the disease’s spread and origins in favor of social media posts that praised the response of the government and President Xi Jinping. Then, starting in late February, such posts took on a more aggressive tone, accusing the West of xenophobia and casting doubts on the virus’s origins.
The shift in message can be seen in the social media posts below, provided by Recorded Future. The first is from early January and the second from Feb. 29:
Both tweets are from Global Times, a Chinese propaganda account that has 1.7 million followers. According to Recorded Future, Global Times and other such media outlets—including Xinhua, People’s Daily, CCTV, and CGTN—have posted tens of thousands of coronavirus-related items on services like Twitter and Instagram.
Recorded Future’s account is consistent with a similar report published by news site Pro Publica last week, which describes a massive Twitter disinformation operation run by the Chinese government. Pro Publica claims the operation initially focused its attention on Hong Kong, but then shifted to a flood of coronavirus coverage. The publication also noted that the campaign appeared to be directed at Chinese expatriates and cited unnamed sources who said China was paying influential Twitter users to spread propaganda.
Axios on HBO aired an interview it had conducted with Cui Tiankai, the Chinese ambassador to the United States, nearly a week earlier in which Cui reiterated his original Feb. 9 assertion that spreading coronavirus-related conspiracy theories would be “crazy” and “very harmful.” Cui was referring, albeit indirectly, to claims that the coronavirus that causes COVID-19 was developed in a military lab, perhaps in the United States, promoted by fellow Chinese officials. He particularly appeared to distance himself from the recently touted conspiracy by a spokesperson from the Chinese Ministry of Foreign Affairs (MFA) that the U.S. military may have brought the coronavirus to China, retorting, “I don’t have the responsibility to explain everybody’s view to you.”
The statement kicked off speculation over a possible split or spat within the MFA: that between the well-respected Cui and his less polished colleagues Zhao Lijian and Hua Chunying, both spokespeople for the MFA; Zhao and Hua have been tweeting that the United States may be the source of the virus—and thus the appropriate target for all coronavirus-related blame.
For example, Bloomberg wrote on March 22: “Such public differences are rare among Chinese officials who are famous for their ability to stick closely to the Communist Party’s official line” and quoted another observer who called Cui “professional” and “an adult” whose words should be taken as an authoritative representation of the true MFA position.
But the assertion that there is anything short of a leadership consensus within the Chinese Communist Party (CCP) to spread conspiracy narratives is ill-conceived. Indeed, despite a momentary turn to the language of conciliation from Zhao, what observers should be focusing on instead is the consistent core of messaging coming from all of Beijing’s official and propaganda channels, including Cui: that the question of the source of the virus is a scientific question that requires listening to scientific and expert opinions—not U.S. or other foreign officials. Not a single reputable epidemiologist has shown any evidence that the coronavirus came from anywhere else but China, and the Italian doctor whose comments were taken out of context to boost the case has publicly refuted it. Yet this is important because by permanently, or even temporarily, injecting doubt into the origins of the coronavirus through this question, Beijing hopes to escape blame for its initial cover-up of the outbreak in December and January, which cost the world precious time to rally resources and create a potentially successful containment strategy.
To understand this, though, requires a comprehensive dissection of China’s evolving narrative on the coronavirus’s origins since February, which reveals a two-pronged approach aimed at redirecting blame away from China and sowing confusion and discord among China’s detractors for its bungling of its initial coronavirus response.
Beijing first began leveraging studies and statements made by scientists to advance its claim that the coronavirus may have originated outside China in late February. The first studythat offered ammunition for the effort was published on Feb. 20 under the auspices of the Chinese Academy of Sciences and the Chinese Institute for Brain Research. It concluded that the Wuhan seafood market—as opposed to China at large—might not have been the source of the virus. One week later, the official People’s Dailywas the first to leap from doubting the Wuhan market as the place of origin to doubting China as the country of origin.
“Zhong Sheng,” a homophonous byline meaning “Voice of China” (or perhaps more aptly China’s alarm bell) whose bellicose commentaries are collectively written by the paper’s international department in representation of the People’s Daily on foreign affairs, wrote on Feb. 28 that determining a disease’s origins is “difficult” and that the coronavirus “did not necessarily originate in China.” On the same day, a CGTN reporter seemingly fished for further talking points at a press conference for the World Health Organization (WHO) by asking about the possibility the virus came from outside China. This solicited a reply from Michael Ryan, the executive director for WHO’s Health Emergencies Program, that “disease can emerge anywhere. Coronaviruses are a global phenomenon.” While the doctor’s statement referenced diseases at large, the quote would not only be referenced by Zhong Sheng on March 20 but also framed to support the narrative that the coronavirus could have emerged anywhere.
From March 4 to 9, the MFA opened a second authoritative channel to disentangle China from the growing global catastrophe when its MFA spokespeople in press conferences and on individual (but Beijing-controlled) Twitter accounts claimed that the current coronavirus outbreak’s origins were yet to be determined.
It was at this time that U.S. officials began to hit back. U.S. Secretary of State Mike Pompeo called the coronavirus the “Wuhan virus” and stated in an interview that “no less authority than the Chinese Communist Party said it came from Wuhan.” U.S. National Security Advisor Robert O’Brien was blunter, pointing out that “rather than using best practices, this outbreak in Wuhan was covered up.” U.S. President Donald Trump stated in a nationally televised address that the outbreak “started in China and is now spreading throughout the world.”
By March 11, the CCP found its full footing, and the official propaganda line on the coronavirus’s origins crystallized when MFA spokesman Geng Shuang remarked in a regular press conference: “Regarding the question of the origins of the virus, this is a scientific question that requires listening to scientific and expert opinions.” It would be repeated over the coming weeks nearly verbatim. To outsiders, it might have read merely as questioning the wet market story, but it was a clear signal to start obscuring the national origins of the virus.
By March 12, Beijing launched its most bombastic tactic yet: blaming the United States directly for the coronavirus outbreak. To be sure, conspiracies of U.S. plans to undermine China are a regular feature of the Chinese internet. But this time the MFA itself was the source. Zhao unleashed a tweet storm accusing the U.S. Army of bringing the virus to Wuhan in October.
Perhaps due to the U.S. State Department’s summoning of Cui to warn China against pushing the U.S. origins conspiracy further, MFA spokespeople dropped their conspiracy theories for a week. But by March 20, the MFA was at it again, this time sowing new confusion by intertwining different, if related, U.S.-China disputes. That day, both Zhong Sheng and Geng repeated the official line that “the origins of the virus are a scientific question that requires listening to scientific and expert opinions.” Yet Geng went further, adding the new wrinkle that the United States is expelling Chinese journalists to “hinder the outside world from getting information on the United States’ epidemic situation.” Zhao and Hua built on this canard on Twitter the same day.
An ever-changing coronavirus propaganda: narrative
Chinese state media coverage of the 2019 novel coronavirus outbreak has gone through several phases since the first cases of the SARS-like illness emerged in Wuhan in late December.
Cracks in the narrative: Some state media coverage has seen pushback by citizens—including youth—who find certain propaganda distasteful. One state-run newspaper published a video of women healthcare workers having their heads shaved before returning to treat patients; intended to portray them as “beautiful warriors” against the epidemic, the video was widely derided as humiliating and sexist. Likewise, a video by the state broadcaster China Central Television Channel (CCTV) showing a nine-months-pregnant nurse treating patients at a hospital in Wuhan drew criticism for using the woman as a “propaganda tool.”
- January: People’s Daily too busy for an epidemic: Analysis from the China Media Project shows that from January 1 to January 20, the Communist Party's flagship People's Daily newspaper ignored the emergence of a novel coronavirus in Wuhan, instead giving priority to coverage of speeches and other activities by CCP General Secretary Xi Jinping. It was not until January 21 that the virus was finally acknowledged on the paper's front page. While other domestic Chinese media covered the unfolding crisis in the following days, it did not reappear on the front page of the People’s Daily until January 26, when the paper ran an article about a meeting of the Standing Committee at which members had discussed prevention and control of the illness.
- Late January to early February: Xi disappears from public for 12 days: On January 27, Premier Li Keqiang became the first senior party leader to visit Wuhan. However, Xi Jinping remained uncharacteristically out of the public eye during late January and early February, sparking speculation about his own health, or factional CCP infighting. Xi reemerged on February 10, wearing a face mask and visiting doctors at a Beijing hospital.
- Early February to early March: Heroic profiles of sacrifice, and creating a “positive environment”: As public concern about the virus grew, state propaganda outlets began to promote stories of individual sacrifices made by frontline medical workers. Even the death of the Wuhan doctor Li Wenliang, who was punished by local authorities when he first attempted to share news of the virus in late 2019, was framed by state media as a tragic story of individual heroism—though coverage omitted his role as a whistleblower silenced by local officials. State authorities also encouraged media outlets to highlight positive stories, such as citizens leaving anonymous cash donations at government offices in order to assist in the fight against the virus.
- Late February: Winning on an ongoing war: State media eventually began using coverage of the fight against the virus to bolster the credentials of the Communist Party and of Xi Jinping personally. Chinese state media announced on February 26 the release of a book, A Battle against Epidemic: China Combatting Covid-19 in 2020, which aims to present the party as having responded to the disease with skill and speed. But with the virus continuing to spread, many online derided the book as ill-timed.
- Late February into early March: Emerging narrative blaming the United States: Since the end of February, conspiracy theories about the origins of Covid-19 have begun to circulate online in China, many suggesting that the virus originated in the United States. Some have speculated without evidence that deaths in the United States caused by vaping were instead due to the coronavirus. Such narratives were further bolstered on February 27 when top Chinese epidemiologist Zhong Nanshan stated that the virus may not have originated in China. This anti-American narrative—subtly stoked by other official statements, state media reports, and the convenient absence of censorship for posts shifting the blame to the United States—have resonated among many in China, and to some degree have been successful in refocusing anger and frustration away from the party.
[paste:font size="5"]including on “self-media” platforms like WeChat, while professional journalists took advantage of the government’s slow response to publish reports on the early days of the outbreak and life under the dramatic lockdown of numerous cities in China. The state-owned magazine Sanlian Lifeeven published an article on the potential impact of the coronavirus on China's economy, although it was later ordered deleted.
By early February, tighter censorship began to be enforced following a meeting of the Politburo on February 3 to discuss the epidemic. On February 5, the Cyberspace Administration of China (CAC)issued a notice concerning media coverage of the virus. In the announcement, public WeChat accounts were accused of having “illegally carried out reporting activities,” while the CAC placed internet companies like Sina Weibo and Tencent under “special supervision.” Tightened censorship following a period of relative openness when a sudden crisis emerges is a pattern that has occurred before, including following the 2008 Sichuan earthquake, and after a fatal 2011 high-speed rail crash.
Of particular concern to government censors has been coverage of Li Wenliang, the Wuhan doctor who along with seven of his colleagues had been disciplined by local authorities for trying to share information about the coronavirus as early as the end of December. An article in Beijing Youth Dailyabout Li falling ill after treating an infected patient was ordered deleted by government censors on January 28. Following the doctor's death on February 7, an outpouring of public mourning and anger led to the government issuing censorship instructions to all mediaordering them not to “sensationalize” the topic. Meanwhile, shortly after the hashtag “WeWantFreeSpeech” began trending on the Sina Weibo microblogging platform after Li’s death, it was swiftly censored.
Three additional dimensions of the escalation in state censorship are especially notable:
Even before the outbreak, new internet censorship rules targeting “negative content,” “sensationalist headlines,” and “excessive celebrity gossip” were scheduled to come into effect March 1. How these new regulations will be used to further tighten control over the media landscape—including over information about the coronavirus—remains to be seen.
- WeChat account shutdowns: Since early February, censors have cracked down on personal WeChat accounts, not only deleting messages but also suspending accounts, in an attempt to limit criticism of the Chinese government's handling of the epidemic. The closures have affected large numbers of ordinary users, including those sharing seemingly innocuous or state-approved content, leaving them with more limited avenues for communicating with family and friends, obtaining news updates, or using electronic payment services as a result. When users complained about censorship using the hashtag “WeChat Blocked Account,” posts using this hashtag were also deleted.
- Live-streaming platforms and WeChat delete critical, factual, and neutral information: According to a March 3 report from the Canada-based research group Citizen Lab, live-streaming platform YY began censoring words related to the coronavirus on December 31, while WeChat began censoring coronavirus-related content in early February. Crucially, some of the censored content was neither criticism of the state nor “rumors,” but simply neutral references to state policies or media coverage of the epidemic.
- Hundreds detained amid new rules criminalizing rumors: On February 10, the Chinese government issued new guidelines stipulating criminal chargesagainst people who use social media to spread rumors about the virus, criticize the state’s response to the crisis, or otherwise impede the fight against Covid-19. Such measures are having a pernicious effect on China’s already constrained media environment. According to Chinese Human Rights Defenders, 452 netizens have been punished for “spreading rumors” as of March 2.
[paste:font size="5"]thermal scanners to identify those with a fever, opportunities for citizens to obtain a record of their recent travels from state-run mobile phone companies, and electronic door seals that alert authorities if people under quarantine leave their homes. Three larger trends are particularly notable, in part because of their long-term implications:
The use of surveillance technologies in response to the virus has raised new concerns over citizen data privacy and protection, as well as the long-term uses of collected data. While local governments claim that personal data collected as part of the fight against Covid-19 will be destroyed after the epidemic ends, critics are skeptical. A March 1 report by the New York Times suggests that Alipay's “health code” QR-scanning feature shares the user's personal information and location with the police. Moreover, Chinese internet users have increasingly expressed fears that their personal information could be stolen or sold to third parties without their knowledge.
- Quarantine and contact-tracking apps:China is making use of new mobile apps as part of the fight against Covid-19. The “Close Contact Detector” app, created by the State Council, the National Health Commission, and China Electronics Technology Group Corporation, uses information from public authorities and mobile data to alert users if they have been in the vicinity of people suspected to be infected. There are concerns that the app—which requires the phone number and national ID number of users—shares private medical information, and could be used by the Chinese government to collect additional personal data on users. Other tech companies have developed similar apps in partnership with local governments. Alipay has worked with authorities in Hangzhou to create a feature for its mobile-payment system that assesses individuals’ supposed health; people scan a QR code at entrances to markets and apartment buildings, with a satisfactory result required for entry. The feature is now reportedly used in 200 cities across China. Alipay has announced plans for further expansion of such efforts, including for a new program that will draw from individuals’ travel history and basic health information to produce recommendations about quarantine measures. Tencent has added a similar feature to WeChat accounts based in Shenzhen.
- Expanding real-name registration on transportation and public venues:Commuters in Shanghai are being encouraged to use WeChat, Alipay, or the map app Autovani to scan a QR code after boarding subway cars. The system, similar to programs implemented in other cities across China, is intended to help authorities track the spread of the coronavirus and is currently voluntary. In other cities, local authorities have worked with tech companies Meituan Dianping and Dida Chuxing to implement mandatory real-name registration systems for all riders using QR scanners to board public transportation. In Beijing, movie theaters that have closed due to the virus can only reopen if they record the name, address, and national ID numbers of all patrons.
- Facial recognition upgrades: Chinese citizens are being encouraged to wear face masks to prevent the spread of Covid-19, with one consequence being renewed attention to enhancements in facial-recognition technology. Chinese tech company SenseTime announced in late February that its cameras were able to recognize faces based solely on the limited parts of the face that a mask-wearer leaves visible. Surveillance cameras equipped with facial-recognition software are already being used to identify people suspected of breaking quarantine.
[paste:font size="5"]prevented from entering Hong Kong. Yon, who previously covered the territory’s antigovernment protests as an independent journalist, believes he was barred from the city due to his public support for the protest movement.
- Teachers and students arrested for Lennon Wall posts: On February 24, police arrested one teacher and 14 studentsin Kwai Chung for hanging posters on a Lennon Wall at a pedestrian overpass. Police claimed that the teacher had led the students, who are reported to be in their mid-teens, “to break the law.”
Positive developments: Amidst continuing restrictions on press and political freedoms in Hong Kong, there have been some pieces of good news. On February 21, prosecutors withdrew rioting charges against two men who participated in protests last August 24, the first known cases of such charges being dropped. And on February 24, Hong Kong Free Press, an independent English-language digital news outlet, was shortlisted for the Index on Censorship’s Freedom of Expression Awards.
- Jimmy Lai and others arrested amid state media smears: On February 28, local media tycoon Jimmy Lai, founder of the local tabloid Apple Daily and a prominent supporter of the prodemocracy movement, was arrested for “illegal assembly.” He was taken into custody along with the vice chairman of the Labour Party, Lee Cheuk-yan, and former Democratic Party chairman Yeung Sum, due to their participation in an August 31 protest march that was banned by police. Lai is also accused of verbally abusing a journalist from a pro-Beijing publication in 2017. The three men could face up to five years in prison if convicted. Some 7,100 demonstrators have been arrested and 1,120 were prosecuted between June 9 of last year and January 24; human rights groups have criticized these prosecutions as politically motivated. They moreover underline a pattern of selective justice in Hong Kong, given the relative impunity for well-documented police brutality and violence by gangs against journalists, including reporters for Apple Daily, as well as prodemocracy protesters. Chinese state media praised Lai’s arrest, denouncing him as a “traitor,” a “Hong Kong riot mastermind,” and “a political tool for foreign forces.”
[paste:font size="5"]the most downloaded app for both Apple and Android systems in January, according to data publish by Sensortower. Helo and Vigo Video, two other entertainment apps owned by the same Beijing-based parent company, ByteDance, and popular in countries like India, were also among the top ten overall for Apple store downloads. Several apps owned by Tencent, including WeChat, also performed well. The high number of smartphone users within China also ensured that Chinese-language news apps like Toutiao and Tencent News were among the world's most downloaded news apps that month.
- US designates Chinese state media as “foreign missions,” caps work permits:On February 18, the US State Department named five Chinese state media organizations foreign missions. Under the new rules, the five media outlets—Xinhua News Agency, China Radio International, China Global Television Network, and the distributors of China Daily and The People's Daily—will be required to provide the US government with a list of their employees, and seek permission if they wish to purchase property. On March 2, the State Department further announced caps on the maximum number of Chinese citizenspermitted to work for these agencies in the United States. The move came in apparent reprisal for China’s abrupt expulsion of three Wall Street Journal reporters in February.
- US Census Bureau ads in Chinese-language outlets draw criticism: In order to reach Chinese-speaking audiences in the United States, the US Census Bureauwas reportedly planning to publicize the 2020 Census through ads purchased on Chinese state-owned CCTV4, among other Chinese-language outlets, some known for their strong pro-Beijing stance. After the plan emerged in the media, however, the Census Bureau clarified that CCTV4 had been added to a list of potential community media outlets in error, and that ad space in the outlet had not been purchased. Also excluded from the ad list were outlets known for criticism of the Chinese government, such as the Epoch Times and the San Francisco Bay area radio station Sound of Hope, the latter of which had been included in a list of Census advertisers in 2010. Media groups with links to the Chinese government that were contracted to run census ads include Sinovision, ChinaPress, Phoenix TV, and Sky Link TV; analysts noted that the prevalence of contracts with state-friendly media reflected the Chinese government’s long-standing efforts to coopt US-based, Chinese-language outlets.
- Chinese diplomats take to Twitter:Since late 2019, Chinese diplomats have been taking to Twitter in ever-greater numbers to promote the Chinese government’s views before international audiences, even as the platform remains blocked in China. Currently there are 68 Chinese diplomats who use Twitter, including Ambassador to the United States Cui Tiankai, and Ambassador to the United Kingdom Liu Xiaoming. Responses to these social media activities have been mixed. Some diplomats’ use of undiplomatic language has backfired: for example, China’s consul general to Kolkata, India, Zha Liyou, was criticized by users after telling a critic that they would be “eradicted just like [a]virus.” Others, like Ambassador to South Africa Lin Songtian, have seen their criticism of the US government gain traction. Beyond Twitter, Chinese diplomats are becoming increasingly bellicose. In a February 2020 interview with theEconomist, China's ambassador to Sweden warned that “for our enemies, we have shotguns.”
- Beijing’s foreign influence over the arts: Over the past month, photographers, cartoonists, and dancers that Beijing is hostile to have faced censorship and smears due to direct Chinese government action or self-censorship by event organizers—though some efforts have been thwarted after public exposure. On February 19, the Hong Kong Free Pressreported that the Sony World Photography Awards removed from its websitephotographs of the Hong Kong protest movement by nominees Ko Chung-ming, David Butlow, and Adam Ferguson, citing their “sensitive nature.” After public pushback, Butlow and Ferguson's photographs were fully restored, though Ko's were only partially returned to the website. On February 7, an art exhibit hosted by a pro–Hong Kong democracy movement organization in New South Wales, Australia, was initially forced to exclude work from noted dissident Chinese artist Baidiucao at the request of the gallery owner, a decision that was later reversed. In Perth, Australia, a freedom of information request revealed that in March 2019, a publicly funded theatre center was forced to apologize to the Chinese consulate after hosting a Taiwanese dance performance. And in the United States, public health officials have sought to refute false rumours that attendees at Shen Yun dance performances were at risk of contracting the coronavirus from the ethnic Chinese dancers, noting that, among other things, the troupe is banned in China because many of its performers practicing Falun Gong. The Falun Dafa Information Center reported on February 26 that the rumors were being deliberately spread in the United States and South Korea by individuals linked to the Chinese state.
Of course Australia acted promptly to counter early Sinophobia that led to local Chinese been mistreated and their businesses shunned.
And our Border Force acted with great compassion to demand cruise ships immediately leave territorial waters and bad luck if sick crew died on the return journey.
Maybe you should ask many local Muslims how they feel about their ongoing treatment in Australia?
read some news the COVID19 is actually attacking TCells a la HIV, not a good news and wondering how healed people areFrom what I have read, it has a HIV component and as far as I know there is no vaccine for that.
What if it stays latent in your system, untill your immune system is comprised, then the pneumonia presents?
That IMO would explain some of the panic, by the authorities.
Just my thoughts.
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?