At the Advertising Standards Authority (ASA) we deal with complaints on a daily basis that ads, among other things, make children fat, impact on...

At the Advertising Standards Authority (ASA) we deal with complaints on a daily basis that ads, among other things, make children fat, impact on body confidence, encourage unsafe practices or commercialise friendships through peer pressure. Advertising is big business and, for some, advertising by big business is bad for children.

We're committed to protecting young people from harmful or inappropriate advertising, but we don't believe that ads are, in and of themselves, 'bad'. Besides, it's not realistic to bring up children in a bubble away from the commercial world.

However, advertisers clearly have a responsibility to get their ads right from the outset. The creative judgments they make go a long way to ensure that ads directed at or seen by children are appropriate and don't contain themes or messages that, for example, frighten, upset or harm them.

What might surprise some is that business collectively, as well as individually, has a direct stake in achieving responsible advertising. UK advertising is governed by a system of self-regulation: industry writes the advertising codes that are independently administered by the ASA. For more than 50 years we've had to keep step with consumer and societal expectations. In no area has this been more important than when it comes to protecting children.

New technology has been the biggest challenge for us. In 2001, we upheld our first complaint about a commercial text message. A little over 10 years later we're dealing with converged media platforms that deliver instant news, entertainment and interaction.

Children, unsurprisingly, aren't fazed by new technology. In fact, they're embracing it. Research by Ofcom reveals that since 2011 there has been a 50% increase in 12-15 year olds owning smartphone devices. Almost two-thirds (62%) of this age group now has one; up from 41% the previous year – and significantly higher than the UK average for adults of 50%.

If a clear indication of the shifting landscape was needed, we've just published a ruling involving an app designed for children by Weetabix. We decided it exploited children's credulity and made them feel inferior if they did not buy (or ask their parents to buy) Weetabix's products.

This ruling was only possible because industry extended our online remit in 2011. The same rules that apply to all other ads now apply to marketing that appears on advertisers own websites, Twitter feeds, Facebook pages and apps. Given the uptake of internet-connected devices among young people this has been an important step in boosting protections.

As we all know, keeping children safe in a 24-hour, instant access, multimedia world can be a difficult task. Regulation can raise demanding questions. Which country has the jurisdiction to act in a virtual space? How can you force an advertiser to comply with the rules when they alone control what goes on their website?

No organisation can cast a safety net across the entire online global marketplace; just look at the difficulties that governments have encountered tackling online piracy. But that doesn't mean we shouldn't try. By thinking inventively we can make online ad regulation remarkably effective. For example, we have a new sanction that allows us to run search ads highlighting a problem advertiser's unwillingness to stick to the rules: a relatively simple solution that is very effective at bringing such advertisers into line.

Our current priority is keeping pace with what children are seeing and doing online. We'll soon be publishing research into children's use of social media, which will shed light on the kinds of ads they're seeing. It will no doubt throw up some challenges for us and society as a whole: if children enjoy unfettered use of the internet, then what are the responsibilities of regulators, businesses and parents?

Claire Perry MP, the prime minister's new advisor on the sexualisation and commercialisation of childhood, has already suggested that parents should intervene more by perhaps reading their children's text messages or switching off the home router. Business has been asked to play its part, such as by providing better parental controls on internet services.

A key theme in all this is that business has a central role to play. It is often at the cutting edge of technology and has a keen understanding of what customers want. By working with business we can tackle problems quickly and effectively: creating new rules or guidance; providing training and advice or by taking action against advertisers who get it wrong.

When we're confronted with a regulatory problem, it's not legislation we turn to in the first place, but businesses and trade associations. It is they who refuse to carry ads that break the rules, remove trading privileges to bring problem operators into line and who tighten the regulatory regime if that's what's needed. Peer pressure doesn't always have to be a bad thing.

Lynsay Taffe is director of communications, marketing and public affairs for the Advertising Standards Authority

Source: The Guardian

"Make your privacy policy readable. Avoid collecting data that you don’t need for the app to function normally. Alert users with...

"Make your privacy policy readable. Avoid collecting data that you don’t need for the app to function normally. Alert users with “enhanced measures” if third parties are collecting information, including for advertising.

These are among the tips offered by the California attorney general, Kamala Harris, to mobile app developers, their advertising partners and the platforms that host them. Ms. Harris’s office has taken a keen interest in how mobile applications inform their users about the personal data they collect. Last year, she persuaded companies like Apple and Facebook to require apps to display privacy policies, though it is entirely unclear how many people bother to read them, especially on small cellphone screens. In December, she sued Delta Air Lines for failing to tell users how its mobile app used the personal information it collected.

On Thursday, she released a report chronicling what her office called best practices. They go well beyond the requirements of state and federal law – and as such, are unenforceable.

“Along with the many wonderful capabilities these apps offer, we remain mindful that the mobile environment also poses uncharted privacy challenges, such as the difficulty of providing consumers with meaningful information about privacy choices on small screens and the many players who may have access to sensitive user information,” the report stated. “These are challenges that we must confront and that we must resolve in a way that appropriately protects privacy while not unduly stifling innovation.”

The recommendations include those directed at the ad networks that operate silently with app developers, tracking user behavior and deploying it to show tailored advertisements. It is common practice these days for ad networks to collect the unique and immutable numbers that identify each mobile device. The attorney general’s report discouraged ad networks from using device identifiers and instead “transition to using app-specific and/or temporary device identifiers.” She also nudged ad networks to issue privacy policies of their own and explain how they use personal data.

The report also recommended that app developers make clear to users what kind of personal information is collected, for how long is it stored and with whom it is shared. It encouraged using “plain language and a format that is readable on a mobile device,” including by using graphic icons, and offering users a way to change the privacy choices they have made before."

Source: NYT

BY LAURAN NEERGAARD AND JENNIFER AGIESTA

ASSOCIATED PRESS 

WASHINGTON (AP) -- Everyone could use a little help keeping...

BY LAURAN NEERGAARD AND JENNIFER AGIESTA

ASSOCIATED PRESS 

WASHINGTON (AP) -- Everyone could use a little help keeping those New Year's resolutions to slim down. But if it means the government limiting junk food, the response is an overwhelming, "No."

Americans call obesity a national health crisis and blame too much screen time and cheap fast food for fueling it. But a new poll finds people are split on how much the government should do to help - and most draw the line at attempts to force healthier eating.

A third of people say the government should be deeply involved in finding solutions to the epidemic. A similar proportion want it to play little or no role, and the rest are somewhere in the middle, according to the poll by The Associated Press-NORC Center for Public Affairs Research.

Require more physical activity in school, or provide nutritional guidelines to help people make better choices? Sure, 8 in 10 support those steps. Make restaurants post calorie counts on their menus, as the Food and Drug Administration is poised to do? Some 70 percent think it's a good idea.

"That's a start," said Khadijah Al-Amin, 52, of Coatesville, Pa. "The fat content should be put up there in red letters, not just put up there. The same way they mark something that's poisonous, so when you see it, you absolutely know."

But nearly 6 in 10 people surveyed oppose taxes targeting unhealthy foods, known as soda taxes or fat taxes.

And when it comes to restricting what people can buy - like New York City's recent ban of supersized sodas in restaurants - three-quarters say, "No way."

"The outlawing of sugary drinks, that's just silly," said Keith Donner, 52, of Miami, who prefers teaching schoolchildren to eat better and get moving.

"People should just look at a Big Gulp and say, `That's not for me.' I think it starts when they are young and at school," he added.

Despite the severity of the problem, most of those surveyed say dealing with obesity is up to individuals. Just a third consider obesity a community problem that governments, schools, health care providers and the food industry should be involved in. Twelve percent said it will take work from both individuals and the community.

That finding highlights the dilemma facing public health experts: Societal changes in recent decades have helped spur growing waistlines, and now a third of U.S. children and teens and two-thirds of adults are either overweight or obese. Today, restaurants dot more street corners and malls, regular-sized portions are larger, and a fast-food meal can be cheaper than healthier fare. Not to mention electronic distractions that slightly more people surveyed blamed for obesity than fast food.

In the current environment, it's difficult to exercise that personal responsibility, said Jeff Levi of the nonprofit Trust for America's Health, which has closely tracked the rise in obesity.

"We need to create environments where the healthy choice becomes the easy choice, where it's possible for people to bear that responsibility," he said.

The new poll suggests women, who have major input on what a family eats, recognize those societal and community difficulties more than men do.

More than half of women say the high cost of healthy food is a major driver of obesity, compared with just 37 percent of men. Women also are more likely than men to blame cheap fast food and to say that the food industry should bear a lot of responsibility for helping to find solutions.

Patricia Wilson, 53, of rural Speedwell, Tenn., says she must drive 45 minutes to reach a grocery store - passing numerous burger and pizza joints, with more arriving every year.

"They shouldn't be letting all these fast-food places go up," said Wilson, who nags her children and grandchildren to eat at home and watch their calories. She recalls how her own overweight grandmother lost both her legs and then her life to diabetes.

More than 80 percent of people in the AP-NORC poll said they had easy access to supermarkets, but just as many could easily get fast food. Another 68 percent said it was easy for kids to purchase junk food on their way to school, potentially foiling diet-conscious caregivers like Wilson, who doesn't allow her grandchildren to eat unhealthy snacks at home.

"If they say they're hungry, they get regular food," she said.

Food is only part of the obesity equation; physical activity is key too. About 7 in 10 people said it was easy to find sidewalks or paths for jogging, walking or bike-riding. But 63 percent found it difficult to run errands or get around without a car, reinforcing a sedentary lifestyle.

James Gambrell, 27, of Springfield, Ore., said he pays particular attention to diet and exercise because obesity runs in his family. He makes a point of walking to stores and running errands on foot two to three times a week.

But Gambrell, a fast-food cashier, said he eats out at least once a day because of the convenience and has changed his order at restaurants that already have begun posting calorie counts. He's all for the government pushing those kinds of solutions.

"I feel that it's a part of the government's responsibility to care for its citizens and as such should attempt to set regulations for restaurants that are potentially harmful to its citizens," he said.

On the other side is Pamela Dupuis, 60, of Aurora, Colo., who said she has struggled with weight and has been diagnosed as pre-diabetic. She doesn't want the government involved in things like calorie-counting.

"They should stay out of our lives," she said.

The AP-NORC Center survey was conducted Nov. 21 through Dec. 14. It involved landline and cellphone interviews with 1,011 adults nationwide and has a margin of sampling error of plus or minus 4.2 percentage points.

---

Associated Press writer Stacy A. Anderson and News Survey Specialist Dennis Junius contributed to this report.

Dan Russell-Pinson has designed some of the top educational children’s apps for the iPhone and iPad.

Monster Physics is a game...

Dan Russell-Pinson has designed some of the top educational children’s apps for the iPhone and iPad.

Monster Physics is a game that lets kids build virtual contraptions, operated by a customizable furry monster, to complete missions — clearing debris using an electromagnet, for example — while teaching them common physics terms. One of his other apps, a geography-focused game called Stack the States, was voted the “Best Kids App for iPad” according to the independent online “Best App Ever Awards”.

Just don’t ask Russell-Pinson which parts of his games his customers — who are four years old and up — like best. The Charlotte, N.C. entrepreneur doesn’t know.

Russell-Pinson has chosen not to collect the analytics — data about how his users interact with the app — because he does not want to accidentally violate the Children’s Online Privacy Protection Act.

COPPA limits what information an online operator may collect from children without parental consent. The law also restricts marketing to children under 13.

As analytics become more important for improving and refining games, the COPPA rules have left open a question about what anonymous user data a developer can collect from children playing the games.

“I’m a little hesitant to innovate because of COPPA,” Russell-Pinson said. “At this point I don’t know what I can and cannot do, and if in doubt you do less.”

For example, at one point Russell-Pinson had considered expanding his apps and allowing kids to play with each other over the Internet. To facilitate the technical requirements of social gaming, “there would have to be some type of sharing — like a screen name or location in order to match up two players,” Russell-Pinson said. “But I’m afraid to do that because I’m uncertain [of potential COPPA violations].”

Russell-Pinson’s hesitancy is not uncommon. Many small business owners lack the resources to hire legal talent that could guide them through the intricacies of COPPA, which could become more complex in the months to come.

COPPA regulations make clear that certain protected data — “personally identifiable” information, like a child’s full name, social security number, and address—is off-limits to operators without parental consent.

Until recently, developers have assumed they could make more use of “persistent identifiers” — numerical code from the device, for example, had been fair game, as long as they weren’t paired with personally identifiable information. This meant that developers could collect usage data tied to persistent identifiers, even if children happened to use the device.

However, in August of this year, the Federal Trade Commission proposed that even persistent identifiers, irrespective of whether they are tied to personal information, will require parental consent for children under 13. The revision is open for comment until September 24, and the FTC aims for the rule to be enacted by the end of the fall, according to FTC senior staff attorney Phyllis Marcus.

The FTC has made an exception for “internal use”, which would allow an operator to pull data tied to persistent identifiers, only if the data is used to improve the app. Data about a user’s progress in an educational app, for example, could only be used to make the app a more effective teaching tool — but could not specifically be passed on to an advertiser.

This could present a problem to app makers who wish to use the information for advertising and monetization purposes.

Though internal use is allowed, some developers might be reluctant to collect analytics “because analytics companies don’t want to get into the mix here — they’re too worried about knowing what kinds of Web sites or online services [data] is being used on,” Marcus said.

However, she emphasized that the FTC would “love to see people stay in this game.”

By Mohana Ravindranath