October, 30 2018, 12:00am EDT
For Immediate Release
Contact:
David Monahan, CCFC: david@commercialfreechildhood.org; (617) 896-9397
Jeff Chester, CDD: jeff@democraticmedia.org; (202) 494-7100
Advocates Ask FTC to Investigate Apps Which Manipulate Kids
Popular games for kids 5 and under lure them to watch ads and make in-app purchases
BOSTON, MA
Today, in conjunction with a major new study that details a host of concerning practices in apps targeted to young children, a coalition of 22 consumer and public health advocacy groups called on the Federal Trade Commission ("FTC") to investigate the preschool app market. The advocates' letter urges the FTC to hold app makers accountable for unfair and deceptive practices, including falsely marketing apps that require in-app purchases as "free" and manipulating children to watch ads and make purchases.
The study, "Advertising in Young Children's Apps," was led by researchers at University of Michigan C.S. Mott Children's Hospital, and examined the type and content of advertising in 135 children's apps. Researchers found a number of troubling advertising practices, including apps that force kids to watch ads or make in-app purchases in order to advance in the game, ads disguised as game play, and beloved characters urging children to make in-app purchases. Advocates assert that these practices are deceptive to kids and parents alike.
"This groundbreaking study demonstrates that popular apps for preschoolers are rife with marketing that takes unfair advantage of children's developmental vulnerabilities," said CCFC's Executive Director Josh Golin. "Disguising ads as part of game play and using cartoon characters to manipulate children into making in-app purchases is not only unethical, but illegal. We urge the FTC to take swift and decisive action to hold app developers accountable for their unfair and deceptive marketing."
Apps in the study, many of them marketed as "educational," often contained video ads that interrupted gameplay and were difficult to click out of without being taken to the app store. Some apps required children to interact with an ad, often by playing a game, before they could close it. In some apps, like Espace Publishing's Kids Animal Jigsaw Puzzle, pop-up video ads took up about as much time as gameplay. Other apps contained advertising that was disguised as play: In Disney's Olaf Adventures, a glowing cake invites children to tap it, but when they do, they find not a game but a pop-up asking them to "protect Anna's cake" by paying $3.99.
Popular characters also pushed kids to buy. In Budge's Barbie Magical Fashion, which has more than 20 million downloads, Barbie encourages children to choose dresses, shoes, and accessories that need to be purchased. In Budge's Strawberry Shortcake Sweet Shop, Strawberry Shortcake suggests that kids purchase premium tools that will make getting stars "even easier."
"With young children now using mobile devices on an average of one hour a day, it's important to understand how this type of commercial exposure may impact children's health and wellbeing," said Jenny Radesky, M.D., a developmental behavioral expert and pediatrician at Mott Children's Hospital and a senior author of the new report. "Our findings show that the early childhood app market is a wild west, with a lot of apps appearing more focused on making money than the child's play experience. This has important implications for advertising regulation, the ethics of child app design, as well as how parents discern which children's apps are worth downloading."
The letter to the FTC was drafted by the Campaign for a Commercial-Free Childhood (CCFC) and the Center for Digital Democracy (CDD), with assistance from the Communications & Technology Law Clinic in the Institute for Public Representation ("IPR") at Georgetown University Law Center. Joining CCFC and CDD in signing the letter were Badass Teachers Association, Centre for Child Honouring, Color of Change, Consumer Action, Consumer Federation of America, Consumer Watchdog, Corporate Accountability, Defending the Early Years, Electronic Privacy Information Center, Media Education Foundation, New Dream, Open MIC (Open Media and Information Companies Initiative), Parent Coalition for Student Privacy, Parents Across America, Parents Television Council, Peace Educators Allied for Children Everywhere (P.E.A.C.E.), Public Citizen, the Story of Stuff, TRUCE (Teachers Resisting Unhealthy Childhood Entertainment), and USPIRG.
Angela Campbell, CCFC Board Member and Director of the Communications and Technology Clinic at Georgetown Law, said "Not only do these apps take unfair advantage of children, they are marketed to parents in a false and misleading manner. A game that requires in-app purchases to play is not 'free.' And distracting features and frequent advertising exposure reduces whatever limited educational value these games might have in the first place."
"This study provides compelling evidence the children's app industry is failing the needs of children and parents," said Kathryn C. Montgomery, Ph.D., Professor Emerita at American University and Research Director of the Center for Digital Democracy. "The research adds to a growing body of scholarship documenting unethical and illegal practices in the children's app marketplace. The FTC should act swiftly to hold app developers accountable." She added, "The study also raises concerns about Google's role in featuring these apps in its Play Store. The so-called 'hybrid monetization' business model, when applied to children, is not only highly inappropriate, but also harmful."
To read the statement in full: https://www.commercialfreechildhood.org/sites/default/files/devel-generate/piw/apps_FTC_letter.pdf
Fairplay, formerly known as Campaign for a Commercial-Free Childhood, educates the public about commercialism's impact on kids' wellbeing and advocates for the end of child-targeted marketing. Fairplay organizes parents to hold corporations accountable for their marketing practices, advocates for policies to protect kids, and works with parents and professionals to reduce children's screen time.
LATEST NEWS
Trump Economic Approval Hits All-Time Low as White House Official Insists ‘Nothing Bad Is Happening’
“Trump’s claims about inflation are false, and you can go to the grocery store and see it yourself,” said one economist.
Dec 11, 2025
A new poll shows US voters' approval of President Donald Trump's handling of the economy has hit an all-time low, even as the president and his officials insist the economy is the best in the world.
The latest Associated Press-NORC Center for Public Affairs Research poll released Thursday found that only 31% of voters approve of Trump's handling of the economy, the lowest figure in that survey throughout either of his two terms in office. Overall, 68% of voters said that the current state of the economy was "poor."
What's more, Trump's approval rating on the economy among Republican voters now stands at just 69%, a strikingly low figure for a president who has consistently commanded loyalty from the GOP base.
Despite the grim numbers, the president and his administration have continued to say that the US is now in the middle of an economic boom.
During a Thursday morning interview on CNBC, Commerce Secretary Howard Lutnick said that the US now has "the greatest $30 trillion economy in the world."
"We are doing great," Lutnick said. "Nothing bad is happening. Greatness is happening. We grew at 4% GDP! Come on!"
Lutnick: "Jay Powell is too afraid to lead the greatest $30t economy in the world. We should be leading with our front foot. Instead we are always leaning back as if something bad is happening. We are doing great. Nothing bad is happening. Greatness is happening. We're growing 4%… pic.twitter.com/uWqrlwpllE
— Aaron Rupar (@atrupar) December 11, 2025
Lutnick's message echoes the one Trump delivered earlier this week during a rally in Pennsylvania, where he said that voters' concerns about being able to afford basics such as groceries, electricity, and healthcare were a "hoax" concocted by Democrats.
"Prices are coming down very substantially," Trump falsely claimed during his speech. "But they have a new word. You know, they always have a hoax. The new word is affordability."
Trump on the US economy: “I said it the other day. And a lot of people misinterpreted it. They said ‘Oh he doesn’t realize prices are high.’ Prices are coming down very substantially. But they have a new word. You know, they always have a hoax. The new word is affordability.” pic.twitter.com/JkErFnkT1D
— Sahil Kapur (@sahilkapur) December 10, 2025
As NPR reported on Thursday, data shows that the prices of groceries and electricity have continued to rise throughout Trump's second term, directly contradicting his claims that prices are "coming down."
University of Michigan economist Betsey Stevenson told NPR that Trump is playing with fire by making false claims about prices when US consumers can see costs persistently going up.
"Trump's claims about inflation are false, and you can go to the grocery store and see it yourself," Stevenson said.
Even some members of Trump's own party are growing wary of him insisting that America is experiencing an unprecedented economic boom when voters feel otherwise.
Sen. Lisa Murkowski (R-Alaska) told The Hill that Trump's insistence on making happy talk about the economy would not fly with voters.
"You can’t call it a hoax and suggest that people are going to believe it," she said. "What you say matters."
An anonymous Republican senator also told The Hill that they were concerned about the optics of Trump building a massive luxury ballroom in the White House at a time when Americans say they are struggling financially.
"The cost of living just makes life very difficult on people," the senator stressed.
And Sen. Shelley Moore Capito (R-W.Va.) gently pushed back on Trump's messaging by telling CNN that "a lot of people are still having trouble making ends meet" in her state.
Keep ReadingShow Less
Trump Tariffs Have Cost Average US Family Nearly $1,200 So Far
"The president’s tax on American families is simply making things more expensive.”
Dec 11, 2025
As President Donald Trump persistently claims the economy is working for Americans, Democrats in the US House and Senate on Thursday released an analysis that puts a number to the recent polling that's found many Americans feel squeezed by higher prices: $1,200.
That's how much the average household in the US has paid in tariff costs over the past 10 months, according to the Joint Economic Committee—and costs are expected to continue climbing.
The Democrats, including Ranking Member Sen. Maggie Hassan (D-NH), Sen. Martin Heinrich (D-NM), and Rep. Sean Casten (D-Ill.), analyzed official US Treasury Department data on the amount of tariff revenue collected since the beginning of Trump's second term as he's imposed tariffs across the European Union and on dozens of other countries—some as high as 50%.
The White House has insisted the tariffs on imports will "pry open foreign markets" and force exporters overseas to pay more, resulting in lower prices for US consumers.
But the JEC combined the Treasury data with independent estimates of the percent of each tariff dollar that is paid by consumers, as companies pass along their higher import prices to them.
At first, US families were paying an average of less than $60 in tariff costs when Trump began the trade war in February and March.
But that amount shot up to more than $80 per family in April when he expanded the tariffs, and monthly costs have steadily increased since then.
In November, a total of $24.04 billion was paid by consumers in tariff costs—or $181.29 per family.
“While President Trump promised that he would lower costs, this report shows that his tariffs have done nothing but drive prices even higher for families."
From February-November, families have paid an average of $1,197.50 each, according to the JEC analysis.
“While President Trump promised that he would lower costs, this report shows that his tariffs have done nothing but drive prices even higher for families,” said Hassan.
If costs remain as high as they were over the next 12 months, families are projected to pay $2,100 per year as a result of Trump's tariffs.
The analysis comes a week after Republicans on a House Ways and Means subcommittee attempted to avoid the topic of tariffs—which have a 61% disapproval rating among the public, according to Pew Research—at a hearing on global competitiveness for workers and businesses.
"Rep. Jimmy Gomez [D-Calif.] read several quotes from [former Rep. Kevin] Brady [R-Texas] during his time in Congress stating that tariffs are taxes that impede economic growth. Brady, who chaired the Ways and Means Committee and drafted Trump’s first tax law in 2017 (and now works as a lobbyist), had no desire to discuss those quotes or the topic of tariffs," wrote Steve Warmhoff, federal policy director at the Institute on Taxation and Economic Policy. "Nor did Republicans address the point made by the Democrats’ witness, Kimberly Clausing, when she explained that Trump’s tariffs are the biggest tax increase on Americans (measured as a share of the economy) since 1982."
Clausing estimated that the tariffs will amount "to an annual tax increase of about $1,700 for an average household" if they stay at current levels, while Trump's decision to lower tariffs on goods such as meat, vegetables, fruits, and coffee last month amounted to just $35 in annual savings per household.
The JEC has also recently released analyses of annual household electricity costs under Trump, which were projected to go up by $100 for the average family despite the president's campaign pledge that "your energy bill within 12 months will be cut in half."
Last month the panel found that the average household is spending approximately $700 more per month on essentials like food, shelter, and energy since Trump took office.
“At a time when both parties should be working together to lower costs," said Hassan on Thursday, "the president’s tax on American families is simply making things more expensive.”
Keep ReadingShow Less
Tlaib Rips Lawmakers Who 'Drool at the Opportunity to Fund War' While Opposing Healthcare for All
"They’re gutting healthcare and food assistance to pay for bombs and weapons. It’s a sick vicious cycle," said Rep. Rashida Tlaib.
Dec 11, 2025
"Imagine if our government funded our communities like they fund war."
That was Rep. Rashida Tlaib's (D-Mich.) response to the House's bipartisan passage Wednesday of legislation that authorizes nearly $901 billion in military spending for the coming fiscal year, as tens of millions of Americans face soaring health insurance premiums and struggle to afford basic necessities amid the nation's worsening cost-of-living crisis.
Tlaib, who voted against the military policy bill, had harsh words for her colleagues who "drool at the opportunity to fund war and genocide, but when it comes to universal healthcare, affordable housing, and food assistance, they suddenly argue that we simply can’t afford it."
"Congress just authorized nearly a trillion dollars for death and destruction but cut a trillion dollars from Medicaid and the Affordable Care Act," said Tlaib, referring to the budget reconciliation package that Republicans and President Donald Trump enacted over the summer.
"They’re gutting healthcare and food assistance to pay for bombs and weapons. It’s a sick vicious cycle," Tlaib continued. "Another record-breaking military budget is impossible to justify when Americans are sleeping on the streets, unable to afford groceries to feed their children, and racking up massive amounts of medical debt just for getting sick."
House passage of the 2026 National Defense Authorization Act (NDAA) came as Republicans in both chambers of Congress pushed healthcare proposals that would not extend enhanced Affordable Care Act (ACA) tax credits that are set to expire at the end of the year, resulting in massive premium hikes for millions.
The nonpartisan Congressional Budget Office estimates that a Senate Democratic plan to extend the ACA subsidies for three years would cost around $85 billion—a fraction of the military spending that House lawmakers just authorized.
The NDAA, which is expected to clear the Senate next week, approves $8 billion more in military spending than the Trump White House asked for in its annual budget request.
According to the National Priorities Project, that $8 billion "would be more than enough" to restore federal nutrition assistance to the millions expected to lose it due to expanded work requirements included in the Trump-GOP budget law.
"Our priorities are disgustingly misplaced," Tlaib said Wednesday.
Keep ReadingShow Less
Most Popular