Some warnings 1 confirmed warning. Checked: 1,485 reviews, the store listing and the privacy label.
From our automated analysis, 31 Oct 2026. Every label links to its evidence in the full report below.
We cannot tell which version of the app this analysis describes. It was run 2026-10-31 .
The store lists the version as varying by device, updated 2026-09-09.
Store screenshots supplied by the developer.
Welcome to Arizona's Family! We're your go-to source for all things Arizona - local news, weather, and sports.
Our team covers every corner of the state, from Flagstaff to Yuma to Tucson, and we're here to keep you in the know.
You can watch our newscasts anytime, anywhere, for free. If you're short on time, check out our on-demand videos and podcasts.
To stay up-to-date, sign up for our customizable news alerts from our newsroom. And if you see something cool happening, please send us your photos and videos! Who knows? You might catch us featuring them on our newscasts soon!
From the developer’s store description.
For developers and the curious
The evidence, sources, measurements and versions behind every label above.
Findings that met the published evidence standard.
Aggressive ad load: raised by 34 distinct reviewers (about 1 in 44 reviews we read)
Advertising volume or placement that interrupts normal use: ads between every action, unskippable or forced full-screen ads.
Specific evidence of a useful property, within the stated scope.
The developer's store data-safety disclosure states that data deletion can be requested; we have not seen a deletion control in the app's own text
The developer's data-safety disclosure on the store states that users can request deletion of their data, or the app's own text offers a way to delete the account. This restates what the developer declares; it is not a test of whether deletion works. Apple publishes no equivalent disclosure, so on an Apple-only listing only the app's own text can support it.
1,485 reviews read for this analysis. Each observation keeps the sample and store it was based on.
Raised by 34 distinct reviewers — about 1 in 44 reviews we read on this store leg (Google Play).
09/09/25. You and your news blocking ads suck Channel 3. Goodbye. There are plenty of other news sources. Too many ads. can't get past ad pop up to the story. What happened to the Rainfall Totals spreadsheet in the weather tab? They used…
I deleted this app. i was excited to download it at first because AZ Family has always been my go to news source. HOWEVER, the pop up ads that won't go away until they are finished iis almost worse than in the kik app. I get a…
Horrible app. They make you watch a full ad before it will even open. Now an ad opens with each story and some are difficult to clear. You spend more time clearing ads than reading anything.
A sampled review illustrates one person’s experience. It does not establish a finding on its own.
“Not assessed” means we could not measure it. It is never a zero and never a pass.
Android package 132.0.14, scanned 31 Oct 2026. These describe that package, not the current store version.
Supporting measurements: not a complete list of possible harms or positives. Measurement vocabulary 1.4 · how these are measured
We cannot tell which version of the app this analysis describes. It was run 2026-10-31 .
The store lists the version as varying by device, updated 2026-09-09.
Each store’s release notes, as the developer wrote them. They are the developer’s words, not ours.
No release notes were provided for this version.
Appworthy
arizona-s-family-news-google-com-doapps-android-mln-mln-46de8bacafb42145d94d3f63b1f99683Assessed 2026-10-31 from 1,485 user reviews, the store listing and its privacy label. We have not scanned the app's package, so nothing on this page was read from inside the app itself.
What the stores publish. Store ratings are the stores’ numbers, not Appworthy’s, and are never averaged across stores.
No itemized purchase list is available for this listing.
This assessment is produced automatically. Three independent signals are read — user reviews, the store listing and the store privacy disclosure — and each candidate finding is filed under the sources that support it.
No charge stands on one kind of evidence — with one published exception. A finding is either a measured fact that anyone can reproduce (an ad SDK is in the package; every recurring plan the store lists is named as weekly, the term read from the purchase names, with a list cut off at the store’s 10-item maximum not assessed; the privacy label omits a tracker we can see), or it is an interpretation — and an interpretation needs independent sources to agree before it reaches the catch list. The exception is a harm only users can see: a charge may publish from reviews alone, as “Reported by N users”, once enough reviewers raise it to clear that charge’s own published bar. That agreement rule is what replaced the human reviewer, not a model’s confidence.
There is no overall score, on purpose. A 0–99 number was published here until 2026-09-15. It was withdrawn because it discriminated too weakly to be the instrument — 44.7% of every pair of apps tied — and because a single number is a verdict where a count is an observation. What publishes instead is a row of measurements, each of which says what was counted and, where we could not look, says that instead.
Findings under One source only are real reports we do not stand behind as findings. They are shown because withholding them entirely would hide a genuine complaint, and labelled because publishing them as charges would be an accusation off a single source.
Write to [email protected], or use the form. Name the finding, the app version and the evidence that needs correcting. Factual corrections are free and never depend on buying anything.