Full Analysis Summary
Danish consumer protest apps
After President Donald Trump's comments about possibly acquiring Greenland, Danes responded by downloading and using mobile apps designed to identify and avoid U.S.-made or U.S.-owned products.
Reports say multiple apps circulated, including Rosenfeldt's "Made O'Meter" and a separate "NonUSA" app, and downloads surged around late January and into February as tensions rose.
Coverage across outlets ties the surge directly to the Trump-Greenland episode and frames the apps as a tangible form of protest by some Danes.
Coverage Differences
Emphasis
Different sources emphasize different aspects of the response: some focus on download numbers and app features, while others stress public sentiment and symbolic protest. For example, theweek.in (Asian) highlights specific download spikes and scan counts, ABC News (Western Mainstream) details the app’s AI features and preference settings, and the Australian Broadcasting Corporation (Western Mainstream) emphasizes mixed public reactions through quoted individuals rather than raw metrics.
Narrative focus
Some outlets present the apps as direct reactions to Trump’s comments, while others describe them as part of broader consumer activism; Associated Press (Western Mainstream) frames the apps in the context of sovereignty talks and public split opinion, whereas Digg (Other) focuses on the developer’s hope to pressure supermarkets.
Product-origin scanning apps
The apps are described as technology-driven tools that use barcode and image scanning and, in at least one case, artificial intelligence to identify product origins and suggest European alternatives.
Rosenfeldt's Made O'Meter reportedly lets users set filters such as "No USA-owned brands" or "Only EU-based brands", and its creator claims accuracy above 95%.
Multiple outlets cite specific download and usage figures — from tens of thousands of downloads over days to over 100,000 downloads since launch — highlighting both the technical features and the scale of user interest.
Coverage Differences
Detail vs. metric focus
Some sources (ABC News, theweek.in) provide technical detail and claimed accuracy for the app, while others (Digg) center on the developer’s stated goals and community reaction. ABC News reports the app “claims over 95% accuracy,” theweek.in gives precise download and scan counts, and Digg highlights the developer’s intention to pressure supermarkets without deep technical detail.
Scope of reporting
theweek.in offers both usage spikes and geographic spread — noting users across Denmark and beyond — while ABC News emphasizes the app’s design features and timing tied to media coverage of Trump’s comments.
Danish public reactions
Public reaction is portrayed as divided.
Some Danes use the apps as a symbolic, personal gesture to avoid well-known U.S. brands.
Others openly reject the movement and say they still like America.
Local voices quoted in coverage include retirees who describe boycotts as symbolic and others who oppose protesting in that way.
Outlets report both enthusiasm and skepticism among the public rather than a uniform national backlash.
Coverage Differences
Tone
Australian Broadcasting Corporation highlights personal quotations that underscore division — citing a retiree avoiding U.S. trademarks as symbolic and another person who says she loves America and opposes the protest — while Associated Press sums up the split public opinion and notes symbolic participation versus rejection.
Depth of local sourcing
Some outlets (ABC News, AP) present quoted local reactions and broader polling-like summaries, while others (Digg) remain focused on developer intentions and online discussion rather than direct public quotes.
Effectiveness of consumer boycotts
Economists and analysts cited in the coverage express skepticism about how much practical impact consumer boycotts can have.
Estimates suggest only a small fraction of grocery items are U.S.-made; Christina Gravert of the University of Copenhagen estimates 1-3%.
Reporters note much American influence is embedded in technology and distribution channels, including that the boycott apps themselves rely on U.S.-based app stores.
Several sources therefore frame the campaigns as largely symbolic unless larger retailers coordinate changes.
Coverage Differences
Practicality emphasis
Associated Press emphasizes economists’ skepticism and the logistical limits — quoting Christina Gravert’s 1–3% estimate and noting U.S. tech pervasiveness and app-store dependence — whereas theweek.in and Digg report the creators’ hopes the apps will influence retailers, presenting a more optimistic developer perspective.
Level of skepticism vs. aspiration
Some outlets (Associated Press) stress likely short-lived consumer-led campaigns and need for retailer coordination, while others (theweek.in, Digg) more readily report developers’ aspirations to change sourcing practices without heavy skepticism.
Media coverage of app backlash
Across coverage, the story's tone ranges from practical reporting of numbers and app functionality to human-focused accounts of divided sentiment and to opinion-lite reminders of the limits of such protests.
Some outlets provide brief roundups placing the apps amid a larger set of headlines, while others follow the developer narrative and user metrics more closely.
Taken together, the sources paint a picture of a symbolic, tech-enabled consumer reaction to a high-profile geopolitical remark rather than a sweeping economic boycott.
Coverage Differences
Scope and placement
The Times of India (Asian) places the apps among a broader roundup of headlines and so treats the story more briefly and off-topic, while Western mainstream sources such as Associated Press and ABC News give it standalone treatment with data and direct quotes; alternative/other outlets like Digg focus on developer aims and online engagement.
Severity and framing
Some sources frame the reaction as a symbolic protest with limited impact (Associated Press, theweek.in), while developer-focused pieces emphasize agency and potential market pressure (Digg, ABC News); the Australian Broadcasting Corporation gives human quotes that underline the divided social reception.