3 things to know:
According to Pixalate’s estimates, 87% of apps in the Google Play Store in H1 2021 purported to be suited for audiences that include children aged 12 and under. However, many of them performed worse regarding major transparency standards than apps aiming for older audiences, according to Pixalate.
One of the most significant differences between apps for kids and those not for kids is seen in the requesting of ‘dangerous permissions.’ According to Pixalate’s analysis, apps for children in the Google Play Store were more likely (69%) to request such permission than apps not for kids (59%).
Moreover, apps for kids in the Google Play Store were more often registered on non-corporate email by a general provider such as Gmail or Yahoo. 56% of apps for kids were registered on such email, compared to 50% for apps not for kids.
However, apps for kids performed much better in one of the most important indicators - having a detectable privacy policy. According to Pixalate’s estimates, 20% of apps for children in the Google Play Store had no detected privacy policy compared to 33% of apps not for kids.
Disclaimer
The content of this report reflects Pixalate’s opinions with respect to the factors that Pixalate believes can be useful to the digital media industry. Any 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, opinions, which means that they are neither facts nor guarantees.
It is important to also note that the mere fact that an app lacks a Privacy Policy, lacks Terms of Service, is Privately Registered, and/or is registered under a Non-Corporate Email does not necessarily mean that such app, or its publisher, is actually exploiting data.
Instead, Pixalate is merely rendering an opinion that these data points may be suggestive of heightened risks to data subjects. Pixalate is sharing this data not to impugn the standing or reputation of any entity, person or app, but, instead, to render opinions and report trends pertaining to apps available for download via the official Google Play Store.
*By entering your email address and clicking Subscribe, you are agreeing to our Terms of Use and Privacy Policy.
These Stories on Mobile
*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.”