Strollerderby : mattel

Barbie’s Dream House Becomes a Reality

SunnyChanel — Mon, 09 Mar 2009 21:30:00 GMT

Barbie is stoked. Today is her 50th birthday, she looks fab, she’s still famous and her Dream House has finally become reality. As part of the festivities to celebrate a half a century or plastic and pink, the potter and interior designer Jonathon Adler was commissioned by Mattel to create a Barbie paradise in a 3,500 square foot beachfront mansion in Malibu.

"Barbie was a dream client because she doesn't exist as a person," Adler said. "She exists as fantasy and is the perfect client because she's always happy and fun and loves everything. I thought to myself, 'How would Barbie live?' What I thought was Barbie would have a house that is glamorous, kittenish, chic, colorful and happy — as well as functional.”

What does a real life Barbie Dream House include?
• A closet filled with 50 pairs of pink peep-toe stilettos.
• A kitchen stocked with ingredients for cupcakes
• A bedroom with wall to wall pink carpeting
• A Warhol portrait valued at $200,000
• A garage with a pink Volkswagen Beetle
• Plus an in house museum with 25 vintage Barbies

To celebrate the new digs there will be a star studded birthday party organized by “event-planner-to-the-stars” (and the dolls) Colin Cowie with A-listers, a signature drink and much pink partying.

If you weren't invited to party with Ken, Skipper and Midge, you can still spend the night is such saccharine sweetness. A large part of the décor will be transported to the Palms Casino Resort in Vegas for a special Barbie Suite. Would you live in Barbie's Dream House?

Source

Dora Grows up—Stops Exploring, Starts Shopping

Hannah Tennant-Moore — Thu, 19 Feb 2009 18:30:00 GMT

Yes, that toothpick-legged, sexy-haired silhouette to the right is the new Dora the Explorer.

According to Nickelodeon, an older, more fashionable Dora line—“featuring fashion dolls and accessories” (sold separately)—will be released in the fall and marketed to tween girls.

The new Dora will go to middle school in the big city and have a “whole new fashionable look.” The keystone of the new doll will be online play, in which kids can change Dora’s clothes and accessories—and also solve a mystery if they feel like it.

It’s no mystery why Nickelodeon would team up with Mattel to expand Dora the Explorer (cha-ching!), but did they really have to shamelessly transform Dora from a fearless outdoorswoman whose best friends are talking animals into a materialistic fashionista? Tween girls are bombarded with enough worries about clothes and appearance as it is.

Considering most children’s obsession with “big kids,” I’m worried that even three- and four-year-old lovers of Dora will be turned on to this stereotypical fashion doll, rather than following Dora and Boots on bilingual humanitarian missions in the great outdoors.

What do you think about the new Dora line--sad makeover, or a way for kids to maintain their connection with a powerful female character?

Image: businesswire.com

Also on Babble:

Liveblogging Toy Fair: Everything You Need to Know About Tween Dora

The Barbie Runway Show – The Hot Ticket at Fashion Week

SunnyChanel — Sun, 15 Feb 2009 20:09:00 GMT

The hot ticket at New York Fashion Week? It wasn’t the Badgley Mischka, Narcisco Rodriguez or Zac Posen show. No, it was the exclusive Barbie fashion show held at the main tent at Bryant Park on Saturday.

The epic production included fifty-one high end designers such as Donna Karen, Diane Von Furstenberg, Betsey Johnson along with smaller fashion houses like Marchesa and Rag and Bones.

The show began with a projected bio of the life and time of Barbie. Then the first model hit the runway wearing an outfit inspired by the swimsuit featured on the first Barbie ever released.

Along with the oodles of press and fashion buyers, in attendance were “by several hundred New York mothers and their young daughters who greeted each model's appearance with screams of delight.”

They were all there to celebrate Barbie’s 50th birthday. She’s aged pretty well. How she kept that waistline in beyond me.

You can check out the runway show below.

Barbie’s Creator A Sexual Pervert

Cole Gamble — Fri, 09 Jan 2009 23:00:00 GMT

C’mon, don’t act shocked. Have you seen Barbie? The slut can’t keep her clothes on. Only a sexual deviant could mastermind such a lascivious little hussy.

According to "Toy Monster: The Big, Bad World of Mattel," Jack Ryan, Barbie's designer, was a "full-blown seventies-style swinger" with "a manic need for sexual gratification."

In the book, a friend of Ryan’s divulges, "When Jack talked about creating Barbie ... it was like listening to somebody talk about a sexual episode, almost like listening to a sexual pervert." Ryan reportedly patronized "high-class call girls to streetwalkers," including a "very thin and child-like" hooker.

Why is it we always hear about the creators of children’s’ entertainment engaging in sexual deviancy? Everybody’s familiar with the urban legends behind Disney’s allegedly perverted animators. And who can forget Pee Wee Herman’s night at the theater? (Years later police found an extensive child pornography collection in Pee Wee’s house) Can you remember other examples of people in children’s entertainment whose nasty deeds were revealed?

Other Barbie related posts:

Smackdown: Barbie and the End of the World

Smackdown: Aw, Just Let Her Have a Barbie

More by this Author:

Should You Take A Risk on Orgasmic Birth? (Orgasmic Birth Video included)

4 Ways Birth and Breastfeeding Will Ruin Sex

Pete Wentz: "I've Tasted Ashley's Breast Milk."

Banana Dildos and the 10 Worst Toys and Gifts This Christmas (part 1)

Desert Island Disks – Kid Music Edition

Meet Chrissa, the Newest, Lamest American Girl Doll

Hannah Tennant-Moore — Fri, 19 Dec 2008 19:30:00 GMT

I remember with perfect clarity the Christmas that I got a Samantha doll as a present. I was well acquainted with all of the American Girls by then, having studied their varied histories and enviously played with my friends’ Kirstens and Mollys. So when I opened the package and found Samantha inside, I already knew that she felt suffocated by her Grandmary’s ideals of what it meant to be “a lady.” I promised to rescue her from her staid Victorian background.

Samantha led a charmed life to be sure, but it was an interesting, charmed life. And it was told in books, which helped me get hooked on reading, taught me a wee bit of history, and helped me identify with people who lived in very different times and places from my own.

Chrissa, who will hit toy store shelves this January, will educate girls about how to navigate social challenges in 2009—through an HBO movie (An American Girl: Chrissa Stands Strong). Instead of combating a historical hardship, such as the oppression of women or World War II, Chrissa is battling “relational aggression.” There's no question that relational aggression is an important issue, but do we have to give even our dolls psychological diagnoses? What about engaging stories, to, you know, distract and cheer up all the kids who are suffering relational aggression?

Am I just being crotchety, or is Chrissa a lame replacement for Samantha?

Photo: USA Today

Mattel Pays Up – Karma for Tainted Toys

SunnyChanel — Mon, 15 Dec 2008 23:15:00 GMT

The big boys will have to pay out the big bucks. Toy behemoth Mattel, Inc was ordered to pay $12 million bucks to be dispersed between 39 states. This was a settlement over the lead-tainted toys that were shipped to the states from China.
Mattel and Fisher-Price (which they own) recalled a TON of toys last year, more than 21 million. There was worry that the toys were finished off with lead paint. Also recalled were toys that had itsy bitsy magnets due to the fear that kids could swallow them.

Moving forward Mattel agreed to “lower the acceptable level of lead in toys shipped to the states to 90 parts per million down from 600 parts per million, which is currently the federal standard.” Who knew was even an “acceptable level of lead” in kids toys?

It does sound like justice has been served and that not only did they have a financial consequence to their lack of oversight but that in the future there will be much more awareness to safety issues with our children’s toys.

Were any of your child’s toys part of the recall? Does this kind of toy scare make you just want to go totally green toywise?

Also check out:

Barbie Beats Bratz in Battle of the Dolls

Via AP

Barbie Beats Bratz in Battle of the Dolls

Kate Tuttle — Fri, 05 Dec 2008 18:29:00 GMT

After a four-year legal battle, toy empire Mattel has finally vanquished Bratz, the vaguely hooker-ish doll line that had nearly sunk the company's venerable Barbie brand. US District Judge Stephen Larson ruled Wednesday that MGA, which makes and sells Bratz, must immediately cease and desist, siding with a lower court's finding that Bratz inventor Carter Bryant had developed the pouty, vampy dols while working for Mattel. That case, decided by jury, gave Mattel $10 million for copyright vilations and another $90 million for breach of contract.

Fear not, Bratz lovers: MGA plans an immediate appeal. And hey, if they lose, remember to steal a motto from the crazy gun fans out there: when Bratz are outlawed, only outlaws will have Bratz. Fess up: aren't you glad these skanky items will likely be off the shelf before your baby girl gets old enough to ask for one?

More by this author:

Baby Nearly Starves to Death, Diluted Formula to Blame
Grandmother’s Right? Or Totally Obnoxious?
Health Scam: Crisis Pregnancy Centers
Mama’s Got a Brand New Bag

Dolls No Longer for Sale, But Always in Our Hearts

Amy Kuras — Tue, 28 Oct 2008 23:01:00 GMT

Thank you, Feminist Law Professors, thank you.

Not for being feminist law professors, although that’s all awesome and great too, but for this post – dolls that are no longer on the market. Because now I can prove to people that what may have been my first Barbie, a bizarre creation called Growing Up Skipper, actually existed.

This doll went from regular, flat-chested Skipper (Barbie’s little sister) to, um, “maturing” Skipper with a twist of her arm. She’d grow breasts, a slimmer waist, and extend her height from 9 inches to nearly 10. I had this doll when I was a little girl and like NO ONE actually believes me that such a thing existed. I guess she was pretty controversial and complaints eventually led Mattel to withdraw the doll.

Another WTF I played with from the Barbie family was “Sport and Shave Ken” – interestingly, not the first shaveable Ken, but definitely the weirdest. As described in the 1980 Mattel toy catalog,“he’s athletic –he’s all man” with his short brown bob, mustard shorts, and long navy pants and sex-AY low-cut white shirt he changes into for his date with Barbie. The guy comes with a blowdryer, shaving mug, and, and here’s where it gets weird, a marker that you use to draw a beard or mustache or, okay, pubes on him (like you wouldn’t have) and then you shave them off with the included sponge-tipped razors. (Thanks, Sunny, for the memory jog).

Providing a refreshing alternative to the Barbie universe of weirdness is the Sunshine Family, which I had forgotten all about until Shannon mentioned them. This family of sweet, simple, hippie-like dolls with long hair and bare feet came with a list of crafts to make for them, like a baby cradle made from a strawberry container. They had a bunch of accessories including a van and a “watch them grow” greenhouse. Ahem.

This doll looked like she was smoking some of what the Sunshine Family may have been growing in that greenhouse. Drowsy (thanks Madeline) said things like “I’m drowsy!” and “I want a drink of water!” when you pulled a string.

Another one from Sunny: Tuesday Taylor. You could turn her scalp to make her hair dark or blond, which as a dark-haired kid in the era of the bleached blond 70s I really liked. And, if memory serves, I owned the Suntan Tuesday mentioned here – you put her in the sun and she got “tan” and had little tan lines. What they didn’t tell you? This only worked once, and even then if you, say, put her next to a lamp because you just couldn’t wait, it really wouldn’t work.

Which of these would you love to see come back? What dolls of today will our kids be shaking their heads at?

So Who's Got 60 Bucks for an Elmo Doll?

Jen Chaney — Mon, 13 Oct 2008 13:03:00 GMT

As Madeline mentioned in Friday's Morning News post, a new Elmo doll will arrive in stores on Tuesday. Called Elmo Live, the electronically-powered Muppet toy is touted as the most realistic Elmo yet, one that can flap his arms and wiggle around just like the Sesame Street character. But all that realism comes at a cost. Specifically, $60, the highest price tag ever for an Elmo doll.

In case you missed it, let me repeat that: Mattel is releasing its most expensive Elmo doll ever during what is, perhaps, the worst economic crisis in American history. Forget Tickle Me Elmo. Try "Slip Me a Couple Bucks, Elmo, So I Can Afford to Buy Your Orange Ass for My Kid at Christmas."

To be fair, as the Wall Street Journal's Tech blog reports, Mattel put this product in development back in 2006, when the economic picture was far rosier. The fact that it's now ready to hit the marketplace makes for some seriously unfortunate timing for the company. Retailers are already bracing for what analysts say could be the slowest holiday season in recent years.

Of course, the power of child persuasion often works even during hard times. If enough impressionable kids see ads for Elmo Live and beg their parents for one, the doll could still wind up selling pretty well. You know, assuming their parents haven't lost their jobs or decided to bail on the holidays altogether.

As Mattel CEO Robert Eckert told the Journal: "If you look at it against other sophisticated robot toys, $60 is not a lot to ask." That may be true. The question is how many people, exactly, will be looking at sophisticated robot toys right now?

Think you'll buy Elmo Live for your kid this year if it wind up on his or her holiday wish list? Or are you hoping that, um, Santa can somehow foot the bill on this one?

Barbie to Bratz: Pay Up B*tch

SunnyChanel — Thu, 28 Aug 2008 01:50:00 GMT

The headline of the Los Angeles Times business section read “Mattel Wins Skimpy Damages in Bratz Doll Case”. How much is skimpy? Well I guess in plastic doll circles, 100 million dollars is considered skimpy. That’s some math I can’t even begin to comprehend. But Mattel had asked for 1.8 billon so they ended up with only about 5.5% of what they really wanted and felt that they deserved.

Why was Mattel looking for some payback in the first place? Well in a nutshell, if you haven’t been following the "war of the dolls", Bratz’s Daddy, and former Barbie designer Carter Bryant, developed the line while under an exclusive contract with toy giant Mattel. But Cater played the field and ended up having the toy company MGA develop the dolls even though Mattel owned his ass (and all his ideas). MGA’s chief officer, who was found to have “secretly aided the designer in breaking his exclusivity” also got a bitch slap from the jury.

But the story doesn’t end there. Mattel will “seek an injunction as soon as next month to stop MGA from making more Bratz dolls.” Oh those dolls, why can’t they all just play nice.

For more information about the trial check out the more informed and eloquent musing on the situation by our own Jen Chaney here:

The Latest on Barbie v. Bratz

In Barbie v. Bratz, Barbie Wins

In The Courtroom: Barbie V. Bratz

In Barbie v. Bratz, Barbie Wins

Jen Chaney — Sun, 20 Jul 2008 13:02:00 GMT

In case you missed the news a few days ago, it looks like Barbie has won her court battle with those younger, sluttier Bratz.

The jury in the Barbie vs. Bratz trial ruled that MGA Entertainment, the company that makes Bratz, is guilty of contract interference and copyright infringement. The reason: Former Mattel designer Carter Bryant was, in the jury's eyes, still under contract with Mattel when he came up with the idea for Bratz. In other words, MGA stole what was rightfully Mattel's, and now MGA will have to pay.

How much is unclear. The second phase of the trial will determine the amount of damages. And of course, there's always the possibililty of appeals, not to mention another pending lawsuit in which MGA accuses Mattel of stealing designs from them. It appears MGA won't give up their Bratz without a fight.

Now, I don't have a dog -- or a doll -- in this fight. But I'm kinda glad to see Barbie as the victor only because, you know, she has seniority. And despite the debut of S&M Barbie, I still think she's classier than those big-headed mini-hos.

Related Post

The Latest on Barbie v. Bratz

In the Courtroom: Barbie v. Bratz

Topless Barbie Leads to Man's Arrest

S&M Barbie

The Latest on Barbie v. Bratz

Jen Chaney — Wed, 11 Jun 2008 15:28:00 GMT

The epic Battle of the Dolls -- otherwise known as the trial over who really owns the concept for Bratz, Mattel or MGA Entertainment -- is getting underway in California. And some of the proceedings are already providing fodder for comedy.

Yesterday, a judge ruled that lawyers can present evidence that shows Carter Bryant, the creator of Bratz and a former Barbie designer for Mattel, erased files from his computer a few months after Mattel sued him. The best part? He deleted the files by using a program called ... wait for it .. "Evidence Eliminator." Where did he download that software, at reallyiamnotdoinganythingsuspicious.com?

Mattel's attorneys contend that Bryant was attempting to get rid of proof that he came up with the Bratz concept while still under contract to Mattel. Meanwhile, lawyers for MGA are using what I'll call the porn defense: Actually, he was just using "Evidence Eliminator" to rid his computer of sexually explicit pop-up ads. Really, Bryant doesn't win either way on that one.

More updates from the trial will come as news, or just stuff that makes me laugh, breaks. (It's going to be a sweet, sweet day when Ken takes the stand. You can bet that dude knows a little something about "Evidence Eliminator.")

In the Courtroom: Barbie v. Bratz

Jen Chaney — Thu, 29 May 2008 12:32:00 GMT

The trial of the century -- okay, maybe the No. 2 Trial of the Century, just after R. Kelly -- is underway. It's Barbie v. Bratz in a civil suit destined to rock this nation to the very core of its being. As the court proceedings get underway, here is a brief primer on what's at stake in this battle of the less-than-progressive-toys for little girls.

The Barbie Side

Who is involved in the suit: Mattel Inc., the company behind one of the most enduring dolls in toy history.

Their argument: One of their designers, Carter Bryant, crafted the Bratz dolls while he was working at Mattel. Therefore, Mattel deserves a share of the profits from the Bratz franchise.

Their argument, in easier-to-digest form: "Those slutty dolls with the oversized heads and collagened lips were totally our idea!"

What's at stake: The reputation of the less slutty, though not necessarily liberated, Barbie, as well as potential revenue for Mattel, which has not been strong of late.

The Bratz Side

Who is involved in the suit: MGA Entertainment Inc., the company behind the lucrative Bratz franchise.

Their argument: Bryant came up with the concept for Bratz while on hiatus from Mattel, and therefore Mattel is not entitled to any Bratz profits.

Their argument, in easier-to-digest form: "Those slutty dolls with the oversized heads and collagened lips were created by someone who used to work at Mattel, but didn't when he created these dolls. So suck it."

What's at stake: If they lose the lawsuit? Potentially precious profits from the multi-billion-dollar Bratz line.

Who Will Testify:

A number of Mattel designers and possibly Bryant himself, who apparently settled a separate set of claims this month for an undisclosed amount.

Who Would Testify if This Trial Took Place in My Barbie Dreamcourthouse:

Skipper (Don't think for a second that she doesn't know about some serious, lowdown s@!%.)

Jon Voight, who starred in the "Bratz" movie.

Da Brat. Granted, she has nothing to do with this. But maybe she could bust out a little "Fundafied."

Members of the group Aqua, who sang "Barbie Girl," a track that, on more than one occasion, made me question my reasons for continuing to exist on this planet.

Updates regarding the trial will be posted here at Strollerderby as warranted.

Photo: theage.com.au

Barbie, Mother Earth -- Who Can Tell the Difference?

Madeline Holler — Thu, 24 Apr 2008 14:33:00 GMT

Did you celebrate Earth Day by picking up a new wardrobe (plus accessories) for Barbie? You're so green!

That's right, the likely phthlate-rich, BPA-loaded Barbie doll has gone all Earth Mother, as Mattel unveiled her new limited edition eco-friendly accessories, "Barbie BCause." (All those chemicals have impeded progress on her good-spelling, however.)

No, Barbie ain't shilling organic cotton totes or fair-trade silk handbags. Rather, Mattel is "repurposing" scraps from her other crap to make hobo purses, make-up bags, diaries and more.

The company says the scraps would have gone right in the trash, before Barbie turned them on to greener ways.

Am I being cyncial when I say the greenest part of the project is the extra money for Mattel? (Shit, the mini-messenger bag costs $11.99! Scraps, people, scraps!)

But what do you expect from such on old broad, huh?

Image: Courtesy of Mattel

World's Worst Kid's Products Announced

Karen Murphy — Tue, 30 Oct 2007 11:28:00 GMT

Every year, Consumers International ("the global voice for consumers") announces the year's International Bad Product Awards, international brands guilty of abusing consumer rights. Any thoughts as to the winners this year? McDonald's? Mattel? Good guesses, all of them, but sorry. Wrong. This year's winner is Takeda Pharmaceuticals of Japan, and you'll never guess why they won.

Sleeping pills. For kids. Complete with "back-to-school" images in the marketing. Because who doesn't think of sleeping pills when they think about back-to-school? And this despite obvious health warnings against pediatric use of the medication. But why worry about health warnings when you've got stuff to sell?

Next up: Coca-Cola, for selling Dasani bottled water, aka "tap water." What, you thought Dasani was maybe, I dont know, spring water? Or somehow better than tap water? Something other than tap water? Nope.

And then: Kellog's. Because high-sugar high-sodium junk food should always be marketed to kids using cartoon characters.

Not to leave out: Mattel. Because you know they had to make this year's list, didn't you? For "stonewalling US congressional investigations and avoiding overall responsibility for the global recall of 21 million products." That sounds substantial, doesn't it?

And a big round of applause to this year's winners!

More Mattel Recalls! (Stop, Diego, Stop!)

Karen Murphy — Sat, 27 Oct 2007 17:22:00 GMT

Oh, Diego, I'm so very disappointed. You see, I've been prepared to try to actually like you, since you do seem marginally less annoying than Dora. And, jaguars! We like jaguars (though the automobile kind are horribly expensive to maintain...you can tell anyone that who thinks they want one. My advice about that is...don't.), yes indeed we do. But the lead, the lead kills...

Though parents are warned! to keep everything in perspective! because the lead in toys is still minimal compared to all that damn lead paint in those peeling flaking windowsills in your house!

But still, Diego has to Go! Go, Diego, Go! And take your 38,000 Fisher-Price Animal Rescue Boats with you! (Ooh! rescuing animals with BOATS! AWESOME! I think I like you again!) And it squirts water! I think I'm in love...

(And then everyone say, all together: "Poor Mattel...")

Have one of these? Then you paid about $15 for it, and can get it alllll back by contacting Fisher-Price with your tale of woe. Woe, Diego, woe.

Mattel Says, "Um, Sorry China"

Kelly Mills — Sat, 22 Sep 2007 13:23:00 GMT

Dear China,

I feel like we have let this go on for too long. I understand why you are upset: after all, I did recall maybe a few more things than I should have. You know how it is! You start recalling, and then you get scared, and you see the opportunity to recall more, and you don't really want the government to come down on you hard, so you just get a little recall-crazy. I let my emotions get the best of me. And, well, I can also see why you might be a little miffed, since folks assumed that everything I recalled was because of lead paint, when in some cases it was my design flaw that caused the problem. You feel like you took the fall for my problem to a certain extent. I get it. You are mad. I don't blame you.

But baby, what is done is done, and I can't take it back. I told the American people it was partially my fault. I accepted responsibility. And no, I didn't just wait until the fervor around recalls died down to do it: I meant to do it before, but I've been so darn busy. But look, I don't think this should be the end of us. I mean, we have something magic here! Cheap toys for us, lots of employment for your folks...I believe we can work this out. Look, just to show you how much you mean to me, I'm giving you $30 million for the Barbie store in Shanghai. And these roses. Please take them as a token of my undying affection, as a symbol of our undying love.

I know you'll forgive me. I believe it in my heart. Plus, this relationship works so well for both of us. We'll just grow closer and our love will grow stronger for being tested like this.

Yours Eternally,

Mattel

Things Fall Apart: It's a Lead, Lead World

Karen Murphy — Sun, 16 Sep 2007 18:18:00 GMT

My three-year old has taken to watching "It's a Big, Big World." It comes on right after Teletubbies, which means I have an hour of uninterrupted blogging time if I can stand an hour of existentialist/acid trippy/environmentalist children's public television. Which I can, because, after all, an hour of uninterrupted blogging time? Punctuated by the occasional procurement of snacks? I can live with that.

However, I'm pretty sure that Snook the sloth would be aghast to find out that the Fisher-Price 6-in-1 Bongo Band with his likeness on it is covered with toxic lead paint. Lead paint that's rather anathema to the message of the show, as far as I can tell (not having actually watched more than a couple of minutes at a time, though the songs, the songs kill me and I always cry, what a wuss), which seems to preach a bit on the oneness of the universe and blah-di-blah. Which I rather like.

But. We're taking lead paint and toxicity here, so let's get down to it: the recalled set has product number K9343 inside the orange drum, and a date code between 139-7SH and 232-7SH is printed on the drum’s orange ring surface. The recall only extends to the sets that have both product number and date code. Affected sets were sold at a variety of stores in July and August 2007 for about $20.

If you own this, and 8900 of you do, contact Fisher-Price (a division of Mattel; I have to point that out) or phone them at(888) 496-8330.

Things Fall Apart: Huge Mattel Recall!

Karen Murphy — Thu, 02 Aug 2007 13:07:00 GMT

A massive recall has been initiated by toy company Mattel this week, and there's an excellent chance that one of the affected toys is in your home if you have a toddler pining for Elmo or Dora. Almost a million toys were affected (One! Million! Toys!), although 2/3 of those were stopped at the retail level from reaching consumers when Mattel contacted toy sellers like Wal-Mart and Toys 'R Us to halt sales of the lead-covered toys.

These aren't the cheap little dollar-store toys we usually talk about that have been recalled; nope, these are highly visible, could-be-in-your-home toys.

Here's a list of all the affected toys.

Apparently Nickelodeon and Sesame Workshop, who license the characters Dora and Elmo respectively, will be initiating third-party product testing to ensure something like this doesn't happen again. While that's probably a relief to toddlers everywhere, it doesn't speak to the larger problem of outsourcing in a country that may or may not share the same safety regulations as the countries it exports to.

And at the consumer level, we have no way of knowing where that cat food, those tires, or those toys were made, and whether they might ultimately be harmful because of either inadvertently or willfully relaxed safety standards. Which means we are relying on our own government and the largesse of companies that profit from what we buy to protect us and our children from harm.

Ugh. Right now I feel like crawling into a cave.

Toy-maker Mattel: Role Model for Doing Business in China

MetroDad — Thu, 26 Jul 2007 15:32:00 GMT

The recent wave of recalls and warnings from China has ignited worldwide concern about the safety of Chinese products in a wide swatch of industries. Surprisingly, safety experts in the U.S. believe that the world's largest toymaker, Mattel, may be the best role model for how to operate prudently in China.

From the NY Times comes the story of how Mattel has invested in a sprawling test lab in China, where scores of technicians are doing everything from setting Chicken Dance Elmo dolls on fire, wrecking Hot Wheels cars to yanking at the limbs of Dora the Explorer. The lab workers are paid to break toys, pick apart their innards, and analyze the raw materials that go into them. And in the interests of full disclosure, the company pays independent auditors to inspect factories and post reports on the Internet. These auditors also check to ensure that no child labor is being employed and that all workers are being treated fairly.

Interestingly enough, Mattel was one of only two major toy makers that agreed to allow a reporter for The Times to visit one of its factories in China — or even to put an executive on the phone to discuss the issue of Chinese product safety. Hasbro, LeapFrog and Zizzle — the maker of Pirates of the Caribbean toys, among others — all declined requests. Hmmm...wonder what they have to hide!

Little Mommy Day. Because it's Never Too Early to Brainwash Kids

Rachael Brownell (Redsy) — Mon, 14 May 2007 11:24:00 GMT

Mattel designated the day before Mother's Day as "Little Mommy Day." Little girls are no longer little girls. They are "mini-mommies." Denise Richards and Dayna Devon brought along their ~~little props~~ daughters to take part in a Beverly Hills Tea Party and other fun activities to kick off the event.

At one point, the little girls took an "oath" to love their little babies. There is no question that kids love dolls and that little girls often identify with their mothers (which is why mine play a game called "yell at the Republicans"), but must we brainwash them to believe that being a "little mommy" is their primary role in life?

Teaching children to be nurturing and loving and considerate of others is incredibly important. And playing "mommy" is often as fun as playing "doctor." If we make our little toddler girls take "oaths" to protect their baby dolls, what's next? Toddler bank accounts?

Equality Now! For Toys?

Rachael Brownell (Redsy) — Wed, 21 Mar 2007 17:04:00 GMT

Toy-maker Mattel is reportedly creating matchbox cars for girls (pink and purple "Polly Wheels") in response to an (apparent) demand for gender specific toys. Remember the joys of Matchbox cars? We used to walk to the corner store (my brothers and I) and buy as many cars as our little chubby hands could carry (they were a Quarter each).

What I don't recall is caring whether the cars were red, blue, pink, purple, or striped. I enjoyed the toy, the function and feel of it, rather than how it looked. I know all kids are different, but isn't part of raising kids teaching them what to care about? It doesn't seem to me that any great thing is accomplished by "girlifying" matchbox cars.

And of course Mattel doesn't plan to launch dolls for boys anytime soon. But what are G.I. Joes anyway? Call them "action figures" if it makes you feel better, but they're dolls.

Barbie as Cultural Catalyst

Patti — Thu, 01 Mar 2007 23:35:00 GMT

Jenna Weissman Joselit's essay at the Jewish Daily Forward about facing off with her niece in the Barbie aisle of the toy store strikes a nerve with me. Barbie is always such a touchy subject for feminists--she has her supporters and detractors, and we are all certain we are correct in our opinions about her.

Something hard to argue about, though, is Barbie's mutability. In the hands of a little girl she is a blank slate, capable of representing nearly any aspect of femininity and yes, of feminism. And in the hands of an adult she can be even more so--witness Joselit's example, Tefillin Barbie--a modified Mattel doll bearing the trappings of a modern Orthodox Jewish woman. This is what has kept Barbie at the top of the toy charts for fifty years: the fact that no matter how much artificial personality her manufacturers and marketing team try to inject her with, she is nothing until she's in the hands of a human being. Once she's out of the box, she is, for better or for worse, whatever you want her to be. There are probably worse symbolic messages to send to little girls than that.

Matchbox Cars for Girls: Stupid Idea or Brilliant Marketing Ploy?

Karen Murphy — Tue, 27 Feb 2007 18:19:00 GMT

Growing up, I loved playing with Matchbox cars. The problem was, I didn't have any. But my brother did; he had lots of them. I loved how the tiny doors could open and close on some models. Would I have played with Matchbox cars made just for girls? Hmm. I think part of the appeal was the gender-neutral qualities of the cars, because they were, well, cars. And cars were for everyone. Right?

Wrong, if you're Mattel and you're betting that the new Polly Wheels cars - each comes with its own tiny Polly Pocket driver - will be a big hit with the girls. Designed with the girly-girl in mind, they'll come in sparkly pinks and purples and soon will even be (gag) scented to coordinate with the colors. Even worse, there are plans for a Race to the Mall game which is said to combine the race-track appeal of Hot Wheels with, well, the mall.

What do you think: does Mattel have a winner on their hands? Would you buy this for your daughter?

Mattel Posts 4th-Quarter Profits: Suck It, Bratz!

Patti — Tue, 30 Jan 2007 14:32:00 GMT

If your holiday gift giving included Barbie, Polly Pocket or TMX Elmo, then you helped Mattel and its subsidiaries exceed their expectations for 2006. The toymaker, whose divisions include Fisher Price, reported strong sales and a higher stock price than forecasters predicted. Barbie showed continued growth for the fourth quarter in a row, in the face of wicked competition from those wily Bratz.

Mattel's American Girl division failed to meet expectations for the year but according to CEO Robert Eckert, still managed to have a record year. New American Girl bistro-boutiques opening this year in Dallas and Atlanta should contribute to the brand's continued growth.

Eckert's discussion of Mattel's success held a dim note for parents: he noted that rising costs of the raw materials and labor used to make his company's toys will likely be reflected at the retail level, though he said that he's been comforted by the fact that consumers (that's you and me, especially if your daughters crave ownership of all twelve Dancing Princesses) are willing to pay higher prices for quality and innovation. Or, maybe we'll just stick with just the one Dancing Princess for now (even if I am secretly hankering for the whole bunch myself). Maybe we'll funnel that money into Mattel stock instead.