Google's Play Store Gives a Worse Age Rating To Fleksy, a Gboard Rival (techcrunch.com) 23
An anonymous reader quotes a report from TechCrunch: Do a search on Google's Play Store in Europe and you'll find the company's own Gboard app has an age rating of PEGI 3 -- aka the pan-European game information labelling system which signifies content is suitable for all age groups. PEGI 3 means it may still contain a little cartoon violence. Say, for example, an emoji fist or middle finger. Now do a search on Play for the rival Fleksy keyboard app and you'll find it has a PEGI 12 age rating. This label signifies the rated content can contain slightly more graphic fantasy violence and mild bad language.
The discrepancy in labelling suggests there's a material difference between Gboard and Fleksy -- in terms of the content you might encounter. Yet both are pretty similar keyboard apps -- with features like predictive emoji and baked in GIFs. Gboard also lets you create custom emoji. While Fleksy puts mini apps at your fingertips. A more major difference is that Gboard is made by Play Store owner and platform controller, Google. Whereas Fleksy is an indie keyboard that since 2017 has been developed by ThingThing, a startup based out of Spain. Fleksy's keyboard didn't used to carry a 12+ age rating -- this is a new development. Not based on its content changing but based on Google enforcing its Play Store policies differently. The Fleksy app, which has been on the Play Store for around eight years at this point -- and per Play Store install stats has had more than 5M downloads to date -- was PEGI 3 rating until earlier this month. But then Google stepped in and forced the team to up the rating to 12. Which means the Play Store description for Fleksy in Europe now rates it PEGI 12 and specifies it contains "Mild Swearing." According to Google, the reason for the rating is because Fleksy's latest app update contains the middle finger emoji... even though Google's own Gboard app also contains the middle finger emoji.
"That's not the end of the saga, though," writes Natasha Lomas via TechCrunch. "Google's Play Store team is still not happy with the regional age rating for Fleksy -- and wants to push the rating even higher -- claiming, in a subsequent email, that 'your app contains mature content (e.g. emoji) and should have higher rating.'" When the Fleksy team pointed out to Google that the middle finger emoji can be found in both keyboard apps -- and asked them to drop Fleksy's rating back to PEGI 3 like Gboard -- the Play team didn't respond.
The discrepancy in labelling suggests there's a material difference between Gboard and Fleksy -- in terms of the content you might encounter. Yet both are pretty similar keyboard apps -- with features like predictive emoji and baked in GIFs. Gboard also lets you create custom emoji. While Fleksy puts mini apps at your fingertips. A more major difference is that Gboard is made by Play Store owner and platform controller, Google. Whereas Fleksy is an indie keyboard that since 2017 has been developed by ThingThing, a startup based out of Spain. Fleksy's keyboard didn't used to carry a 12+ age rating -- this is a new development. Not based on its content changing but based on Google enforcing its Play Store policies differently. The Fleksy app, which has been on the Play Store for around eight years at this point -- and per Play Store install stats has had more than 5M downloads to date -- was PEGI 3 rating until earlier this month. But then Google stepped in and forced the team to up the rating to 12. Which means the Play Store description for Fleksy in Europe now rates it PEGI 12 and specifies it contains "Mild Swearing." According to Google, the reason for the rating is because Fleksy's latest app update contains the middle finger emoji... even though Google's own Gboard app also contains the middle finger emoji.
"That's not the end of the saga, though," writes Natasha Lomas via TechCrunch. "Google's Play Store team is still not happy with the regional age rating for Fleksy -- and wants to push the rating even higher -- claiming, in a subsequent email, that 'your app contains mature content (e.g. emoji) and should have higher rating.'" When the Fleksy team pointed out to Google that the middle finger emoji can be found in both keyboard apps -- and asked them to drop Fleksy's rating back to PEGI 3 like Gboard -- the Play team didn't respond.
Repost from yesterday (Score:5, Informative)
https://tech.slashdot.org/stor... [slashdot.org]
Re: Repost from yesterday (Score:1)
Re: (Score:2)
If that's the reason, fine. But that's not Google's stated reason:
And said screenshot calls out the middle finger emoji.
What's good for the goose is good for the gander, hey?
Comment removed (Score:4, Funny)
Re:Repost from yesterday (Score:4, Funny)
Yeah, but many of us couldn't read it because it was rated NC-17.
What if it was rated NC-1701? Would you have been able to read it then?
Re: (Score:2)
Uh... (Score:1)
Propz to GNAA
Piles of Poo and Fingers (Score:5, Funny)
Sounds like anything that uses Unicode should be rated "Users under 80 should be supervised by an Octogenarian".
Re: (Score:2)
It's just the usual corporate fuck-up, some low level app reviewer didn't respond to an email immediately because they needed to bring it up at the weekly meeting or something.
It's only useful as a story because by bringing attention to it Google might fix the problem faster, or they might not.
Re:Piles of Poo and Fingers (Score:4, Interesting)
It's just the usual corporate fuck-up, some low level app reviewer didn't respond to an email immediately because they needed to bring it up at the weekly meeting or something.
It's NOT the usual corporate fuck-up, because it meant Google's own Gboard app either:
(A) did NOT went through the same rating process as Fleksy, otherwise the same type low level app reviewer would have given Gboard app the same PEGI 12 rating as Fleksy.
OR
(B) Gboard app did went through the same rating process but still got a different rating than Fleksy.
Case (A) is clear cut anti-competitive behaviour, giving preferential treatment to Google's own product.
Case (B) would be an even worse corporate fuck-up because it meant Google's review process was arbitrary and did not have well defined process and criteria. A huge no-no in any big corp, and a huge red flag for any auditors or regulators.
Re: (Score:2)
It's just the usual corporate fuck-up, some low level app reviewer didn't respond to an email immediately because they needed to bring it up at the weekly meeting or something.
It's NOT the usual corporate fuck-up, because it meant Google's own Gboard app either:
(A) did NOT went through the same rating process as Fleksy, otherwise the same type low level app reviewer would have given Gboard app the same PEGI 12 rating as Fleksy.
OR
(B) Gboard app did went through the same rating process but still got a different rating than Fleksy.
Case (A) is clear cut anti-competitive behaviour, giving preferential treatment to Google's own product. Case (B) would be an even worse corporate fuck-up because it meant Google's review process was arbitrary and did not have well defined process and criteria. A huge no-no in any big corp, and a huge red flag for any auditors or regulators.
I'm quite certain it's B, but note that the rating process in question is not Google's, it's IARC's. The reason that Fleksy and Gboard got different ratings is because they filled out the IARC questionnaire differently. What exact questions they answered differently I have no idea. The right way for the Fleksy developers to address this is to talk to IARC, who runs the system that processes the questionnaires and assigns ratings.
Re: (Score:2)
You expect a much higher level of consistency than you will actually get from low level app reviewers.
Google Play doesn't assign age ratings (Score:5, Informative)
This whole thing made sense up until the claimed email from Google Play.
As I understand it Google Play gets its age ratings from and organization called the International Age Rating Coalition [wikipedia.org] (IARC). The app developer fills out an IARC questionnaire [google.com] and an IARC automated system assigns a rating based on the results of an automated evaluation of the questionnaire. The first part of the email exchanges sounds like Thingthing (the company that makes Fleksy) asking Google why they got the rating, and the Google personnel trying to figure it out and giving their best guess as to why Fleksy got that rating.
I can see how the people at Thingthing got confused about the source of the rating, since the IARC questionnaire is submitted through the developer's Play Console account, and it may not be clear that an IARC system evaluates the questionnaire and assigns the rating. The documentation (linked above) does tell developers that they should contact IARC if they don't like their results, but I can see how Thingthing might have missed that.
The story hangs together up to that point. Where it begins to get weird is in the claim that Google told Thingthing that their rating is still too low. The next higher rating is PEGI-16 which applies "once the depiction of violence (or sexual activity) reaches a stage that looks the same as would be expected in real life. The use of bad language in games with a PEGI 16 rating can be more extreme, while games of chance, and the use of tobacco, alcohol or illegal drugs can also be present." I can't imagine what sort of emoji could justify a requirement of PEGI-16.
My guess is that this "rating is too low" message was some sort of misunderstanding, that either Google was talking about something else, or Thingthing misinterpreted.
My core point is that ratings are assigned by IARC, not Google. If Thingthing wants a different rating for Fleksy they should talk to IARC, or maybe just redo the questionnaire.
Disclaimer: I work for Google, though not on anything related to any of this.
Re: (Score:2)
I work for Google, specifically I'm part of the team responsible for app listings in the Play Store. So I am really getting a kick out of all these replies .
So... you're saying the Play Console help article is wrong?
Slashdot Editors Gonna Dup Yo (Score:2)
Dup dup dup do-wah dup dup dup...
Platform owner and direct competitor?! (Score:1)
Re: (Score:3)
I wouldn't say insane but probably is short-sighted.
Third parties put out a useful feature only to have it be hovered up by a company.
This is nothing new.
Operating Systems: Stacker vs Microsoft's DoubleSpace? Norton Utilities or Diskeeper's defrag. Trumpet WinSock. Etc.
Games: Same thing happens. Mod creates useful functionality or QoL (quality of life) and it gets merged into the game as baseline functionality. WoW, Grim Dawn, etc. Hell most of Minecraft's ideas as mods. [reddit.com]
Phones: What happened to those apps
Re: Platform owner and direct competitor?! (Score:1)
Misleading story being used as advertising? (Score:3)
This story appears to not be telling the truth, and in doing so begins to smell like a company trying to do exactly what it claims of its competitor: using an anti-competitive tactic, in this case a manufactured news story with false claims.
If Google was really wholly responsible for this action, having a motive of chilling interest in a competing product and thus being anti-competitive, why would Google stop at the borders of the European market? This Fleksy keyboard is still rated E-for-Everyone in the United States. If Google's motive was to put the brakes to interest in a competing app, would it really be so careless as to change its content rating in JUST ONE market and leave all others untouched?
I call bullshit.
Re: (Score:2)