According to Global Mobile Ad Supply Chain: Privacy & Safety on Apps for Children - Apple App Store (H1 2021), apps for children were slightly more likely to have a privacy policy than the general audience apps. Allison Lefrak points out COPPA as a probable reason making a difference here.
Another concern regarding the mobile ecosystem are delisted apps. In the Delisted Apps Report, Pixalate estimated that 59% of delisted apps had no detectable privacy policy, compared to 16% of apps being live in the Apple App Store. However, apps are being delisted only from the stores. Users must remove the app from their devices on their own.
“The one thing I would like to note from a consumer protection standpoint is that many consumers have no idea when an app is delisted. It does not mean that the app is going to disappear. It stays on their phone unless users take proactive steps to remove it. It is possible that a large number of delisted apps are still out there on people’s devices,” explains Allison Lefrak.
It is essential to remember that even if a mobile app does not have a privacy policy or Terms of Services or is registered with a non-corporate email, it does not mean that the app is maliciously processing the collected data.
Watch the entire video to find more details about children's privacy in the Apple App Store in 2021.
*By entering your email address and clicking Subscribe, you are agreeing to our Terms of Use and Privacy Policy.
These Stories on Thought Leadership
*By entering your email address and clicking Subscribe, you are agreeing to our Terms of Use and Privacy Policy.
Disclaimer: The content of this page reflects Pixalate’s opinions with respect to the factors that Pixalate believes can be useful to the digital media industry. Any proprietary data shared is grounded in Pixalate’s proprietary technology and analytics, which Pixalate is continuously evaluating and updating. Any references to outside sources should not be construed as endorsements. Pixalate’s opinions are just that - opinion, not facts or guarantees.
Per the MRC, “'Fraud' is not intended to represent fraud as defined in various laws, statutes and ordinances or as conventionally used in U.S. Court or other legal proceedings, but rather a custom definition strictly for advertising measurement purposes. Also per the MRC, “‘Invalid Traffic’ is defined generally as traffic that does not meet certain ad serving quality or completeness criteria, or otherwise does not represent legitimate ad traffic that should be included in measurement counts. Among the reasons why ad traffic may be deemed invalid is it is a result of non-human traffic (spiders, bots, etc.), or activity designed to produce fraudulent traffic.”