Apple's Upcoming Updates For Parents Are Good, But They Should Dream Far Bigger
Here's my pitch: Apple should ban advertisements from appearing in apps targeted at children.
Apple devices are incredibly popular among kids. Next to Google, there is no technology company with more of a responsibility to protect children. They don’t make much of the content children interact with, but they’re the gatekeeper to all that.
It’s good when technology companies, even flawed ones, introduce new features for parents. I’m glad Roblox overhauled its parental controls. Too late? Absolutely. Could it be better? Yep. But Roblox isn’t going away, and those changes made Roblox safer.
Thus, it’s encouraging to see that Apple announced new tools for parents with children using Apple devices. Some features are coming “soon,” others later this year.
The highlights, per Apple’s announcement, with brief reactions from yours truly:
A “new set-up process” for creating Child Accounts, with details to come
I’m hoping this is indicative of more changes coming from Apple.
Default child protections turned on, even if a Child Account isn’t fully set up
This is how software should work. Default to enforcement, and wait for the parent/owner to come in and ask for fewer restrictions. The risk isn’t worth it.
“Easily correct” alter the age of a Child Account
It’s already possible to do this, so presumably just a better way of doing it?
“Provide developers with information about the age range of [your] kids,” which will connect with a system where developers can alter what content is accessible
Is there a version of this where they can’t bombard my children with ads?
There are massive implications which Apple calls the Declared Range API, in a world where websites could do legitimate age-gating while respecting privacy. As tech reporter Brian Fung pointed out recently, imagine kids being able to ask permission to view an age-appropriate version of a website! Apple did not respond to a request on whether this would be possible on websites.
The App Store won’t show apps outside of your child’s assigned age range
This is terrific. It’s easier when you don’t have to say “no.”
More granular Age Ratings for adolescents. Currently, apps are rated for ages 4+, 9+, 12+, and 17+, but will become 4+, 9+, 13+, 16+ and 18+, reflecting more nuance
Welcomed, though some of its usefulness feels like it falls on developers.
“Online child safety is one of the most complicated, and pressing, issues facing tech regulators, politicians, and parents,” said social good reporter Chase DiBenedetto, who covered the news over at Mashable. “And, unfortunately, there’s no simple solution to keeping children protected online. Young people will inevitably find their way to digital spaces regardless of a parent’s oversight. That being said, certain tech companies have succeeded more than others in making their platforms safe for young users, with those falling behind facing stronger scrutiny.”
These changes were announced to developers. It’s likely we’ll hear more about these changes when the next version of iOS is announced (June) and the next slate of phones are announced (September), because that means the next iOS will be near, too.
When asked for more details, such as the best method for parents to submit feedback, the company declined to elaborate to Crossplay, and instead pointed me towards the document that Apple had already released to developers. We’ll have to wait and see.
In January, I noted basic parenting tasks are easier with Google’s family controls versus Apple’s. The easiest example is locking a device, which requires a simple button press in Google’s Family Link app but jumping through hoops with Apple.
“I do think Apple takes it seriously,” said The Verge news writer Jay Peters, who covered the Child Account news, and is currently the father of a one-year-old who, thankfully, isn’t dealing with screen time restrictions just yet. “It’s in Apple’s best interest to make products that people of all ages can use—and products that parents will feel safe giving to their kids. (Perhaps the more capitalistic way to say that is that every kid is another potential Apple customer.) Apple also wants to avoid bad news cycles and threats of regulation if their products are found to be unsafe for kids.”
As I’ve argued, regulation is coming. (Apple is already familiar with this in other areas!) A rare place where Democrats and Republicans seem to agree is regulating tech companies, which is going to have important overlap with the way your children interact with Apple devices, the way apps like Roblox or Fortnite function, and more.
“Ultimately, I think Apple wants to decide on its terms how and when to update its products and add features versus being forced to by regulation, so even the threat of regulation might be part of why Apple is making these changes now,” added Peters.
However it’s happening, the heat is working. It’s making these devices better.
I also think it’s worth pointing out that Apple’s approach is far less invasive than other “ID checking” solutions that have been proposed in the U.S. and elsewhere. I thought this point by Dan Moren at Six Colors (via Daring Fireball) was very apt:
It’s also worth noting that these announcements are happening against the backdrop of more stringent age-verification laws enacted in U.S. states like Texas and Oklahoma. Critics of those lawscontend that they unfairly target LGBTQ+ communities. Apple, for its part, says that it holds to a standard of data minimization, not sharing any more information than is necessary. So, for example, offering developers access to the age range of a user—with the consent of a parent—rather than providing a birthdate.
When a business asks your child’s age, they usually trust what you say—they don’t ask for proof through a birth certificate. This solution feels like it (correctly) trusts parents.
We should be allowed to dream bigger, though.
Here’s what I hope Apple announces, should it roll out more a ambitious change:
Apple should ban advertisements from appearing in apps targeted at children.
It does not sound that radical when you say it out loud. It’s common sense.
How many times have you downloaded an app for your child, only to discover the only way for them to keep engaging with it is waiting through an advertisement? How many times has that advertisement clearly been designed to trick you into downloading another app? How many times have you realized making the ad disappear is too tricky for your children, forcing them to hand the phone/tablet back to you, defeating the purpose of distracting your children in the first place? And how many times do you solve that problem by paying for a monthly subscription?
The loop is obvious.
Jam intrusive advertisements into kid-friendly apps, hoping parents will pay up. Offering a subscription service is fine, but the way most apps arrive there is purposely frustrating and should not be an experience tolerated for parents, let alone children.
It’s frustrating, and more importantly, it feels wrong. The exploitation is obvious.
Google shouldn’t tolerate this either, mind you. I’d be delighted if the Google Play Store did this putting pressure on Apple. There is successful precedent for this, too.
Last month, parts of the internet were in a tizzy after discovering Steam, the most popular way to download and play PC games, does not allow games on its service if ads are the primary business model. It’s good policy, but it turns out it’s a policy Steam’s had in place for years now. (It should be noted that Steam is full of junk, too, it just so happens the junk on Steam doesn’t have ads. You win some, you lose some.)
Here’s how Valve, the company who operates Steam, explains its rules:
Developers should not utilize paid advertising as a business model in their game, such as requiring players to watch or otherwise engage with advertising in order to play, or gating gameplay behind advertising. [...] Developers should not use advertising as a way to provide value to players, such as giving players a reward for watching or engaging with advertising in their game.
PC games are not mobile games. Making money selling PC games is very different than making money selling mobile games. Which is why I’m not asking for Apple to ban apps with advertising whole cloth, but I am asking them to ban advertisements from apps that are targeted at children. Or, at the very least, have strict restrictions.
There is other meaningful precedent for this, too.
When Netflix, the biggest streaming service in the world, introduced cheaper plans with advertising, it declined to extend those advertising into kids programming. A Bloomberg story about Netflix’s plans revealed an interesting reason for this choice:
“Netflix has told partners it won’t run ads during original kids programs, said the people, who asked not to be identified because the company is still working out the details. In addition, some studios that have licensed Netflix the rights to kids programs won’t allow the company to run commercials in them.”
It goes further than “some companies think it would be distasteful,” though.
“Children’s programming presents a particular challenge when it comes to advertising. Google and YouTube had to pay $170 million for violating kids privacy laws. Netflix will show kids programs in its news service without the commercials and could, at some point down the line, decide to introduce ads.”
To date, there still are no ads in the kids section of Netflix. It’s refreshing.
If similar regulations existed for apps targeted at kids, maybe the ads would disappear, too. And frankly, Apple should be leading the way on this topic.
Also…the ability to lock my child’s device really easily. That’d be nice, too.
Have a story idea? Want to share a tip? Got a funny parenting story? Drop Patrick an email.
Also:
It’s possible the regulatory scrunty Apple’s facing would stop them from making such a move, but that’s not going to stop me from shooting my shot.
Minecraft got big in our house again, and it’s so nice how pleasant and that game is once you’re in the world and building. None of this ever shows up.
I know there are ways to eliminate most ads with some networking tricks, but this is something that average people should not have to deal with, frankly.
The actual policy changes Apple describes here aren't that meaningful to me. App Store games aren't that edgy, in my experience. My primary motivations for not wanting my kids to play Rainbow Merge Murder Gacha Birds is not the "murder" part but the "gacha" or the ads.
I didn't know that Steam's disallowing ad-supported games was an official policy. Despite my best efforts, my daughter currently prefers games on the iPad and it's an absolute content toilet. The "GET" button for games supported by ads and IAPs is ubiquitous. You can't even find a game that just costs $8 or whatever.
I agree that the mobile ads I come across while gaming are abhorrent. However, as a child who grew up watching Saturday morning cartoons, I take no issue with age-appropriate commercials showing up on entertainment platforms at respectful intervals.
Do you know if a regulatory law is blocking Netflix and Roblox from allowing ads in their kid's content? Is this an FCC issue, or is it more of a corporate value?
As a parent in the business of making games, I applaud advertising superintendence but hope that I would like to see responsible advertising revenue help game developers turn a profit.