Analyzed automatically. Assessed 2026-10-05 from 983 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.
App Store
This analysis describes version 4.34.0 of the app, analyzed 2026-10-05 . The app may have changed since.
The store currently lists version 4.34.0, updated 2026-09-23.
Google Play
This analysis describes version 4.32.2 of the app, analyzed 2026-10-04 . The app may have changed since.
The store currently lists version 4.32.2, updated 2026-09-10.
What the analysis found
Positive evidence 1
Things this app does right, published at the same strengths as the catch list.
One source only — shown, not confirmed 4
A single kind of evidence. We publish these because withholding them would be the bigger distortion, and we do not treat any of them as a finding we stand behind.
What reviewers said
Verbatim excerpts from public store reviews, shown as corroborating user reports. They are not Appworthy audit evidence, and a quotation is not proof of the finding it sits under.
Trial converts to a charge
They charge for the ‘free’ trial — The minute I started my free trial I was charged $9.95.
$15 ‘free’ trial — I was accepting the so called free trial and was immediately charged almost $15. Uh, that’s not free. Ironic how the entire sight is based on fair and honest reporting but they charge for a free trial. Hmmm
Stale content, buggy app — If I select “Show less like this” and then unselect topics, it just says my preferences can’t be updated. It shows the same stories all day even if I swipe down to reload. Even if I go into my preferences and…
Hard to cancel
Nearly 2 months before the renewal date I stopped getting notifications on the app and the app links stopped working, the app was up to date so I couldn't cancel the account from inside and the same day it renews everything from the…
I didn't ask for your annual subscription and now your app won't let me cancel? Great job on losing a reader forever once I can get this figured out!
Awful. They trap you and you can't cancel it.
Paywall blocks the basics
It's ok. It's not exactly unbiased. The bias leaks through despite the Blind Side feature. And, despite providing a prompt asking if I'd like to stay updated on a story, over the course of 2 years, it has NEVER provided any updates on…
Too much behind paywall...
Ground News used to be great (and the concept still is!), but as time as worn on, their paywalls have gotten narrower. I'm no longer interested in what they have to offer given that their profiteering makes them no better than The…
What this app sells
How the automated analysis works
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 subscription bills weekly; 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.
Several measurements above say “Not assessed” because no artefact we hold can answer them. A human review is what resolves those — and it can remove a favourable band as easily as add one.
Hands-on inspections are not yet open.