Watchdog groups have accused Google of using “unfair and deceptive marketing practices” in its YouTube Kids app, arguing the app’s video selection includes content parents would “reasonably believe their children would not be exposed to”.

The complaint to the Federal Trade Commission (FTC), filed Tuesday by Aaron Mackey, staff attorney for Georgetown Law’s Institute for Public Representation, argues the service blurs the line between advertising and programming for kids.

“Our primary concern is that children are exposed to an endless stream of content that may not disclose that they have certain deals with product makers,” Mackey told the Guardian. “And they just pop up on the screen in front of their kids, who are going to be served a lot of ads and not know the difference.”

A Google spokeswoman strongly rejected the assertions. “We worked with numerous partners and child advocacy groups when developing YouTube Kids. While we are always open to feedback on ways to improve the app, we were not contacted directly by the signers of this letter and strongly disagree with their contentions,” she said.

Google launched the YouTube Kids app in February, describing it as “the first Google product built from the ground up with little ones in mind”. But the Center for Digital Democracy, the Campaign for a Commercial-Free Childhood, the American Academy of Child and Adolescent Psychiatry and several others co-signing the complaint, argue that YouTube Kids mixes and matches advertising and programming in a way that “would not be permitted to be shown on broadcast and cable television”.

The complaint is addressed to the FTC, as distinct from the Federal Communications Commission, which oversees communications including broadcasting, cable (but not digital media). While the FCC does not have jurisdiction, despite the fact that some of the programming on the service is repurposed from television, the complaint cites some of the FCC’s rules, noting that the FCC calls this kind of advertising to kids “unfair” and cites psychiatric studies demonstrating that kids lack the ability to tell advertising from programming.



Those TV rules, for example, mandate “bumpers” between programs and commercials – the five-second segments that announce that the show will be right back – while YouTube Kids goes on in an uninterrupted stream.



More seriously, the complaint alleges YouTube violates its own advertising guidelines: “Products related to consumable food and drinks are prohibited, regardless of nutritional content,” says the company’s Advertising on YouTube Kids page, and yet the stream of watchable videos (not the ads, the actual programs) includes a McDonald’s channel, complete with a video starring Mythbusters’ Grant Imahara called “Our Food. Your Questions: What Are McDonald’s Chicken Nuggets Made Of?”

A small tag in the corner reads “promotional consideration provided by McDonald’s.” The complaint alleges that this counts as deceptive marketing by YouTube of the Kids app, not to kids, but to parents.



The complaint also questions “unboxing” videos – user0generated videos of new products, ranging from iPhones and new toys and sneakers, being opened for the first time. Last year Google said it had received 20m searches for “unboxing.”



Google, the complaint notes, “urges advertisers to ‘[c]onsider how unboxing videos might help your brand connect with consumers.’” That kind of content is much harder to regulate that something coming from an established network, or even a studio. That, the complainants say, violates the FTC’s “Guide Concerning the Use of Testimonials in Advertising” (revised as recently as last year to account for massive changes in viewership), which requires that, “[w]hen there exists a connection between the endorser and the seller of the advertised product that might materially affect the weight or credibility of the endorsement (i.e., the connection is not reasonably expected by the audience), such connection must be fully disclosed.”



Regulators have become increasingly concerned about advertising aimed at children online. Last September Yelp and TinyCo paid $450,000 to settle a complaint with the FTC that they had violated the Children’s Online Privacy Protection Act by collecting personal data without explicit parental permission. “The separation principles [between advertising and programming] don’t exist. When you’re a kid, you just think you’re watching My Little Pony 24/7,” said Mackey.