Scanned on 27 June 2026 at 01:16 UTC· 2 total scans
As of , thejournal.co.uk has a GDPR compliance score of 95/100 with 2 pre-consent tracking violations detected.
Only Privacy Score 100 means full compliance. These violations mean that before you could even click the Cookie Consent banner, this website already collected your personal data and shared it with third parties. Learn why this matters (our blog) →
Who is responsible? The website owner is solely responsible for these violations and in general often benefits monetarily (directly or indirectly) from collecting and sharing your data without your consent.
Low-severity concerns: external fonts, empty tag containers, WebSocket connections, and third-party storage.
Most findings on this page are configuration problems, not catastrophes. These plain-language guides explain what each one means and how to fix it, written for website owners rather than lawyers.
All guides live at gdprscanner.eu/guides.
thejournal.co.uk has a GDPR compliance score of 95/100.
A score above 80 indicates minor issues such as non-essential fonts loaded from external servers or low-risk first-party cookies. The website has some room for improvement but avoids severe violations.
2 trackers detected loading before user consent:
Legal basis: This violates GDPR Article 44 and LG München I (Case 3 O 17493/20, 20 January 2022). Loading fonts from external servers transmits visitor IP addresses to third-party servers, often outside the EU. The Munich Regional Court ruled on 20 January 2022 that embedding Google Fonts without consent violates GDPR, awarding €100 in damages per visitor. Self-hosting fonts eliminates this violation entirely.
✓ No tracking cookies detected before consent.
thejournal.co.uk has minor GDPR compliance issues. While 2 violations were detected, these are typically low-severity items such as external font loading or empty tag containers.
Under GDPR, even minor violations can attract regulatory attention, particularly in jurisdictions with active data protection authorities such as France (CNIL), Ireland (DPC), and Austria (DSB). Addressing these issues proactively reduces legal risk.
The ePrivacy Directive requires consent for all non-essential device access. Even low-severity items like external fonts transfer visitor IP addresses to third-party servers without consent.
This GDPR compliance scan of thejournal.co.uk was performed by GDPR Scanner, a pre-consent privacy scanning tool. The scan captures all trackers, cookies, and third-party scripts that load before a user clicks any consent button.
Under GDPR (General Data Protection Regulation), websites must obtain explicit consent before processing personal data. Any tracker or cookie that fires before consent is a potential violation of EU privacy law.
A privacy score of 100/100 means the website loads zero trackers and zero tracking cookies before the user gives consent. This is the standard required by GDPR Article 5(1)(a) and Article 7.
Essential cookies (session management, security tokens) and first-party functional cookies do not incur penalties, as they are covered by the legitimate interest legal basis. See an example: playhth.com scores 100/100.
thejournal.co.uk scores 95/100 with 2 violation(s) detected. Trackers or cookies were found loading before user consent.
Our scan detected 2 tracker(s) loading before consent, including Google Fonts.
thejournal.co.uk has a GDPR compliance score of 95/100 as of 27 June 2026. A score of 100 means no trackers or cookies load before consent. thejournal.co.uk currently has 2 violation(s) affecting its score.
thejournal.co.uk should implement a Consent Management Platform (CMP) that blocks all non-essential trackers and cookies until the visitor gives explicit consent. This includes configuring tag managers like Google Tag Manager to use consent-aware triggers, self-hosting external fonts, and auditing all third-party scripts. After making changes, re-scan with GDPR Scanner to verify compliance.