Few thought of the impact this would have on children. On the family iPad, it was suddenly very normal for the kids to click and see about ten different products or services during one sitting of a game.
Granted, iAdvertisements must follow a strict set of guidelines, designated by Apple. Apple also takes a unique responsibility in policing ad placement, and apparently, Apple has decided that they should not go in games and other apps used by children. Or at least they should appear there less. In May 2011, one app developer received this email regarding ads in his Pokemon themed app:
We periodically review the apps in the iAd Network to ensure that all apps receiving ads are aligned with the needs of our advertisers. Currently, our advertisers prefer that their advertising not appear in applications that are targeted for users that are young children, since their products are not targeted at that audience.Fair enough, and it's easy to see why this was a problem. Parents who let their kids play with their iDevices often forget they have their iTunes account password keyed in, or they leave it in out of convenience. Kids use iDevices as toys, mostly. It can be hard for them to grasp that real money does come into play.
As a result, humongous bills may ensue. It happened for the family whose daughter accrued $1400 of in-app purchases over a single holiday break. Luckily, the Kays got a refund, but small mistakes happen all the time. To app developers and advertiser's content, those small purchases add up.
Is it right to exploit children through advertising and in-app purchases? I hear the cry that it's "just good business." Apple is making an effort on the advertising front, anyway. For now, it's best that parents encourage their children to be more responsible when they're playing with expensive toys.
EDIT: As of April 2011, the user must enter their iTunes password if it has been over fifteen minutes since the last in-app purchase. But what remains to be said of marketing towards children who see applications as a game, not a business?
I think that the iAd software is completely valid. Ads allow developers to make money while keeping prices for aps down. By eliminating ads in order to prevent kids from accidentally purchasing in-app items prices to actually purchase apps would skyrocket, which consumers would definitely not approve of. Accidents can happen, but to me apps seem to be the best possible evil.
ReplyDeleteThe iAd software is probably a good move on the part of Apple, but personally I don't like it. It's encouraging impulse buying in children, whether parents know it or not - and if parents don't confront their kids about it it's going to continues. The difficulty in detecting it is if only a few accidental/impulse purchases are made, parents are likely to ignore them on the bill, and all that money quickly adds up for Apple and for consumers too. At least to make it fair, there should be a required password or code to put in before purchasing an app off an ad, both to prevent children's and adults' accidental purchases.
ReplyDeleteFrom a marketing standpoint it's brilliant. Many companies use "tricks" like that to extract money from parents for their children. For example, Nexon and NX cash are designed to give in-game cosmetics to players but are most frequently bought by younger players who get distracted. There definitely should not be a way to purchase things from iAds directly from the game in my opinion. If it were to link to a site that required credit card information and other things children wouldn't be aware of then the parents would be protected. However, it's highly unlikely that Apple or any company would choose that route because it's easy to profit off of it. As a concept though, putting ads in apps and then giving them out for free (Angry Birds) is a good move.
ReplyDelete