program areas Digital Youth

Contact: David Monahan, CCFC (david@commercialfreechildhood.org (link sends e-mail); 617-896-9397)Jeff Chester, CDD (jeff@democraticmedia.org (link sends e-mail); 202-494-7100)Apps which Google rates as safe for kids violate their privacy and expose them to other harmsAdvocates, lawmakers call on FTC to address how Google’s Play Store promotes children’s games which violate kids’ privacy law, feature inappropriate content, and lure kids to watch ads and make in-app purchases BOSTON, MA and WASHINGTON, DC — December 19, 2018 — Today, a coalition of 22 consumer and public health advocacy groups led by Campaign for a Commercial-Free Childhood (CCFC) and Center for Digital Democracy (CDD) called on the Federal Trade Commission (link is external) (“FTC”) to investigate and sanction Google for the deceptive marketing of apps for young children. Google represents that the apps in the “Family” section of the Google Play Store are safe for children, but the apps often violate federal children’s privacy law, expose children to inappropriate content, and disregard Google’s own policies by manipulating children into watching ads and making in-app purchases.The Play Store is Google’s one-stop shop for Android apps, games, and entertainment. Apps in the “Family” section are promoted with a green star and, in some cases, a recommended age, like “Ages 5 & Under,” or “Ages 6-8.” Google is aware from several recent academic studies that many of the apps in this section are a threat to children’s privacy and wellbeing, yet it continues to promote them with these kid-friendly ratings.“The business model for the Play Store’s Family section benefits advertisers, developers, and Google at the expense of children and parents,” said CCFC’s Executive Director Josh Golin. “Google puts its seal of approval on apps that break the law, manipulate kids into watching ads and making purchases, and feature content like kids cleaning their eyes with sharp objects. Given Google’s long history of targeting children with unfair marketing and inappropriate content, including on YouTube, it is imperative that the FTC take swift action.”Lawmakers echoed the call for FTC action. “We’re repeatedly confronted with examples of tech companies that are just not doing enough to protect consumer privacy – and I’m particularly concerned about what this failure means for our children,” said U.S. Senator Tom Udall (D-NM) regarding today’s action by the advocates. “When real-world products are dangerous or violate the law, we expect retailers to pull them off the shelves. Google’s refusal to take responsibility for privacy issues in their Play Store allows for app developers to violate COPPA, all while Google cashes in on our children’s activity. It is past time for the Federal Trade Commission to crack down to protect children’s privacy.”“Google’s dominance in the app market cannot come at the expense of its clear legal obligations to protect kids that use its products.” said David N. Cicilline (RI-01), the top Democrat on the House Antitrust Subcommittee, who raised his concerns about this issue when the Chairman of the FTC testified last week. “I am pleased that this coalition of consumer and children’s advocacy groups are urging the FTC to scrutinize whether Google is improperly tracking children and selling their data.”Google policies require apps in the Kids and Family section of its Play Store to be compliant with the Children’s Online Privacy Protection Act (COPPA). But, Google doesn’t verify compliance, so Play Store apps for children consistently violate COPPA. Many apps send children’s data unencrypted, while others access children’s locations or transmit persistent identifiers without notice or verifiable parental consent. Google has known about these COPPA violations since at least July 2017, when they were publicly reported by Serge Egelman, a researcher at the University of California, Berkeley Center for Long-Term Cybersecurity. Yet Google continues to promote such apps as COPPA-compliant.“Our research revealed a surprising number of privacy violations on Android apps for children, including sharing geolocation with third parties,” said Serge Egelman, a researcher at the University of California, Berkeley. “Given Google’s assertion that Designed for Families apps must be COPPA compliant, it’s disappointing these violations still abound, even after Google was alerted to the scale of the problem.”Google’s policies also require apps for children to avoid “overly aggressive” commercial tactics, but the advocates’ FTC complaint reveals that many popular apps feature ads that interrupt gameplay, are difficult to click out of, or are required to watch in order to advance in a game. In addition, games represented to parents as free often pressure children to make in-app purchases, sometimes going so far as to show characters crying if kids don’t buy locked items. The complaint also offers examples of multiple children’s apps that serve ads for alcohol and gambling, despite those ads being barred by Google’s Ad Policy.Other apps designated as appropriate for children are clearly not. Some contain graphic, sexualized images, like TutoTOONS Sweet Baby Girl Daycare 4 – Babysitting Fun, which has over 10 million downloads. Others model actively harmful behavior, like TabTale’s Crazy Eye Clinic, which teaches children to clean their eyes with a sharp instrument, and has over one million downloads."Parents who download apps recommended for ages 8 and under don’t expect their child to see ads which promote gambling, alcoholic beverages, or violent video games,” said Angela Campbell, Director of the Communications and Technology Clinic at Georgetown Law, which drafted the complaint. “But Google falsely claims that apps listed in the Family section only have ads which are appropriate for children. It’s important for the FTC to act quickly to protect children, especially in light of Google's dominance in the app market."The coalition has previously asked the FTC to investigate developers of children’s apps, citing research from the University of Michigan that revealed manipulative advertising is rampant in apps popular with preschoolers. Today’s complaint focuses on Google, whose misrepresentation and promotion of those apps has led to hundreds of millions of downloads.“Google (Alphabet, Inc.) has long engaged in unethical and harmful business practices, especially when it comes to children,” explained Jeff Chester, executive director of the Center for Digital Democracy (CDD). "And the Federal Trade Commission has for too long ignored this problem, placing both children and their parents at risk over their loss of privacy, and exposing them to a powerful and manipulative marketing apparatus. As one of the world’s leading providers of content for kids online, Google continues to put the enormous profits they make from kids ahead of any concern for their welfare," Chester noted. “It’s time federal and state regulators acted to control Google’s 'wild west' Play Store App activities.”Joining the Campaign for a Commercial-Free Childhood and the Center for Digital Democracy in signing today’s complaint to the FTC are Badass Teachers Association, Berkeley Media Studies Group, Color of Change, Consumer Action, Consumer Federation of America, Consumer Watchdog, Defending the Early Years, Electronic Privacy Information Center, Media Education Foundation, New Dream, Open MIC (Open Media and Information Companies Initiative), Parents Across America, Parent Coalition for Student Privacy, Parents Television Council, Peace Educators Allied for Children Everywhere (P.E.A.C.E.), Privacy Rights Clearinghouse, Public Citizen, the Story of Stuff, TRUCE (Teachers Resisting Unhealthy Childhood Entertainment), and USPIRG.In addition to filing an FTC complaint, CCFC has launched a petition (link is external) asking Google to adopt the Kids’ Safer App Store Standards, which would bar advertising in apps for kids under 5, limit ads in apps for kids 6 -12, bar in-app purchases, and require apps to be reviewed by a human before being included in the Kids and Family section of the Play Store.###

Around the world citizens (link is external) and governments (link is external) are putting efforts toward limiting the marketing of unhealthy foods to children in order to address the growing obesity (link is external) epidemic worldwide. In the US, Congress and the Federal Trade Commission rely on weak self-regulatory industry standards, but under Canadian Prime Minister Justin Trudeau, the government of Canada wishes to see restrictions placed on the marketing of food and beverages to children. This was a goal written directly into the Health Minister's mandate letter (link is external) signed by Trudeau in October 2017. As a result, Health Canada, the department of the Canadian government with responsibility for national public health, is considering new regulations that would impose broader restrictions on food advertising that is targeted at those under 17. It could cover everything from TV, online and print advertising to product labelling, in-store displays and even end some sponsorships for sports teams. Health Canada's consultations (link is external) on how it should approach restricting advertising of "unhealthy food and beverages" to kids began in June of 2017 and concluded in early August last year. Although a few contributors opposed any attempt to restrict marketing to children, the summary report (link is external) states that "Overall, the proposed approach and supporting evidence for restricting marketing of unhealthy food and beverages to children were well received." The authors of the report point out that the "issue of age was not an area of inquiry," but most contributors supported the idea of including children between 13 and 17 years of age. Aiming to define "unhealthy foods," the consultation proposed to focus on restricting certain nutrients of concern (sodium, sugars, and saturated fats), and most commentators supported setting the stricter threshold option (of 5% ) for the proposed restrictions, which were based on a percentage of daily values (% DV). Commentators strongly preferred that option over the weaker proposal (15% DV). Using the percentage of daily values to define which foods are "healthy" or "unhealthy" relies on the already existing mandatory food labelling for most relevant foods. In addition to the proposal to restrict certain nutrients of concern, the proposed restrictions to the marketing of non-sugar sweeteners to children was also positively received. For the consultation, Health Canada looked at the Quebec ban (link is external) on advertising to children, which has been in place since 1980, and covers any advertising, not just food-related advertising. In that province, companies cannot market unhealthy food to children under 13 years old. Quebec has the lowest obesity rate (link is external) in Canada among children aged six to 11 and the highest rate of fruit and vegetable consumption. The Stop Marketing to Kids Coalition (link is external) (M2K Coalition), which includes the Heart and Stroke Foundation of Canada, the Childhood Obesity Foundation, the Canadian Cancer Society, Diabetes Canada, Dietitians of Canada, and the Quebec Coalition on Weight-Related Problems, supports the so-called Ottawa Principles (link is external). These evidence-based, expert-informed and collaboratively arrived principles call on governments to restrict the commercial marketing of all food and beverages to children and youth age 16 years and younger. Restrictions would include all forms of marketing with the exception of non-commercial marketing for public education. The M2K Coalition has taken this stance because of the complexities associated with defining healthy versus unhealthy food. The ad industry in Canada has some self-regulatory restrictions in place under the Canadian Children's Food and Beverage Advertising Initiative (link is external). That program, in which many major food companies are participants, sets out nutrition criteria for products that can be advertised in environments where kids under 12 make up 35 percent or more of the audience. The Association of Canadian Advertisers has criticized Health Canada's proposal as "significantly overbroad," calling it an "outright ban on most food and beverage marketing in Canada." The Canadian advertising initiative has tightened its criteria over time and is now monitoring online advertising more closely. 2016 was the first full year in which participating companies that advertise to kids had to ensure their products met new, tighter limits (link is external) on calories, sugar, sodium and saturated and trans fats. However, in 2017, a study (link is external) from the Heart and Stroke Foundation of Canada called into question how effective this effort has been. It looked at the most popular websites visited by children and teens, and found ads for products high in sugar, salt or fat. During the time that the Canadian government began to explore the right approach to restricting the marketing of unhealthy foods to children, Senator Nancy Greene-Raine introduced a private members bill in the Senate in the fall of 2016, seeking to amend the Food and Drugs Act to prohibit the marketing of unhealthy foods and beverages to children (Bill S-228). This would put the activities of Health Canada on a legal basis. The Senator amended the bill to reflect the federal government’s proposed approach on raising the age limit to age 16 and under and kept the focus on “unhealthy” food and beverages. Bill S-228, The Child Health Protection Act (link is external), unanimously passed the Senate in September 2017. Two amendments to the bill were introduced during the first hour of debate in the House of Commons in December 2017, which included a reduction in the age of protection to under 13 (from 17) years, and the introduction of a 5-year post-legislation review period. The rationale for the change in the age amendment was to make the bill more likely to withstand a court challenge, given that the Quebec legislation restricting marketing to children under 13 years withstood a legal challenge in the case of Irwin Toy v Quebec (1989). In this case, the Supreme Court of Canada allowed limits on commercial advertising to children under 13 as constitutionally valid. The Court confirmed that "...advertising directed at young children is per se manipulative." (link is external) And so, while the Court found that the restrictions violated the freedom of expression under the Charter of Rights and Freedoms, a majority of the Court considered this violation to be a justifiable limitation necessary to protect children. For now, the bill is working its way through Parliament. Hopefully, the food industry will not further water down the requirements of the bill. If all goes well, our neighbor to the north will have a law in place by September 2018 that will advance public health and put children's health above the profits of the food industry. --- See attached infographic.