Poor iPhone. Or, smartphone-like device that resembles an iPhone. According to Verizon, its 3G coverage means that it has no place in this world except the island of misfit toys.

Other commercials declare that AT&T users will experience a blue Christmas, and that only the naughty will receive AT&T phones as holiday gifts. Ha ha! Sigh.

Verizon Wireless Launches Three More Anti-AT&T 3G Network Commercials [Gizmodo]

Winners include my full-time childhood caretaker, the Nintendo Entertainment System, the creepy stalker known as Furby and adorable, overfed Cabbage Patch Kids.

There's even room for a weird dog on wheels that used to please kids of the 1920s, back before fun was invented. But no Slinky, because it lacked dog, wood, wheels and the ability to play Tecmo Bowl.

Them, of course, be debatin' words. So let's have it, commenters — what's your favorite toy ever?

The Best Toys of All Time [Yahoo, via Kotaku]
(Photo: Yahoo)

For those of you who feel that the term "sugar daddy" is offensive: Mattel says you've got it all wrong. The doll's dog is called "Sugar." Ken is his "daddy." Now don't you feel silly?

"The 'Palm Beach Sugar Daddy Ken' is actually part of the adult Barbie Collector Line," a spokesperson told the New York Post. "It is targeted toward adults."

"The little dog's name is actually Sugar," she said. "That's where the name comes from. He's Sugar's daddy, as a reference to the dog."

Latest Ken putting on the dog [NYP]

Theaters will allow children to watch film clips of their own selection, participate in karaoke contests or chat live with Disney Channel stars via satellite. Computer chips embedded in packaging will activate hidden features. Walk by a "magic mirror" while holding a Princess tiara, for instance, and Cinderella might appear and say something to you.

It's your birthday? With the push of a button, eight 13-foot-tall Lucite trees will crackle with video-projected fireworks and sound. There will be a scent component; if a clip from Disney's coming "A Christmas Carol" is playing in the theater, the whole store might suddenly be made to smell like a Christmas tree.

The makeover happened only after much internal debate at the company. Indeed, some Disney board members fretted that the concept was so lavish that parents would try to use the stores as day care centers. Others worried that people would come for the entertainment but not buy anything.

"It's time to take risks," Mr. Fielding said he told them. "When consumers are ready to spend again, we will be ready."

The article says analysts estimate Disney will spend about a million dollars per store for the remodeling. We think it might be cheaper, and just as effective, if they simply build American Girl facades and hide the Disney stores inside.

"Disney's Retail Plan Is a Theme Park in Its Stores" [New York Times]
(Photo: indy138)

Unfortunately, I am unable to comment on individual Target guest comments/inquiries. At this time, I recommend that you reach out directly to Fisher Price for detailed information on the Rock A Stack as it is a national brand product.

Please know that the safety of our guests has been, and continues to be, our first priority. While currently we do not have plans to remove this toy from our shelves, we continue to work closely with our vendors, industry leaders and the Consumer Product Safety Commission (CPSC), to ensure that we carry the best products – in terms of both safety and quality.

Guests interested in returning the product must present a receipt per the Target return policy. Guests with additional questions are encouraged to contact Target Guest Relations at 1-800-440-0680.

There you have it, folks. Just make sure not to get any blue on your receipt or it might be illegible. Mattel, Fisher-Price's parent company, has not responded to our request for comment.

PREVIOUSLY: Fisher-Price Rock-A-Stack Bleeds Blue All Over Babies

A few weeks ago, I purchased an online gift certificate to squishable.com for my girlfriend Ana for her birthday. She e-mailed me and told me that she wanted a Squishable that was one price rank above the gift card and that she had no problem paying the difference. But when she tried, the system was giving her some form of error. So I went online and decided to just place the order for her and this way pay the difference myself. I found that the error she was receiving was the shopping cart rejecting the purchase for no apparent reason. I thought that perhaps since the cost difference was around $8, the system was rejecting an under $10 order.

I contacted Squishable and told them the situation, asking for a possible alternate method of purchase fulfillment. One of their staff got back to me less than 24 hours later, told me they apologize for the problem and will get their programmers examining it immediately. On top of that, the staff member (Aaron) thanked me for pointing out the problem, and credited my gift certificate the difference needed ($8.26). I went to order again, entered the GC code, had a $0 balance and finished the purchase. Now my girlfriend has her Squishable Tortoise and I strongly recommend Squishable.com for those who significant others like incredibly large huggable plushies =)

We're an equal opportunity site here, Jonathon: a large number of our readers purchase our own incredibly large huggable plushies, too.

This is David. David's mouth started turning blue after he began playing with the Fisher-Price Rock-A-Stack toy.

You know the toy, it's that yellow pole with the stackable colored rings. It's a classic from a trusted brand, which is why his uncle Dan picked it off the shelf at Target.

"We gave it to him and it took about maybe 10 minutes before it got to the blue ring. He was playing with all the other ones and eventually he got a hold of the blue one and was spinnin' it like a steering wheel in his hand. And you could just see like it just comin' off on his hands. And then from his mouth. You're seeing blue around his mouth and that's what drew our attention to him. We looked over and we noticed his lips were turning blue. And we were like, "Uh oh." And they started yelling at me, "Oh, what did you give him?" I said, "It's a toy from Fisher Price... I assumed it was fine. I'm sorry." The ring's blue dye seeped onto David's hands, the pole, the other rings, and the rug, pictured at left.

He's not alone. A few one-star Amazon.com reviews concur, and there's similar tales in reviews on other toy sites.

One mother started Rock-a-stackbluering.blogspot.com to document getting a refund from Fisher-Price.

"After scrubbing the blue ring for a couple of minutes there was still blue dye coming off. My hands and arm had blue dye on the that took a couple of days to come off of my skin," Jen wrote. The picture at left was taken a few days after first contact.

Customers say that Fisher-Price has told them the dye is non-toxic, and refunded or replaced the ring when they complained. The online complaints seem to start in Spring '09. Not all the complaints mention where it was bought, but those that do say Target.

However, Dan wasn't satisfied with a refund. He wanted Fisher-Price to pay for the stained rug. After escalating to the executive office, they agreed to pay for it, but also wanted him to sign a gag agreement saying that he will never talk about the incident ever again. He's thinking about it. "I do want the rug replaced and I don't know any other way about going about it," he said.

David's father Joseph said it wasn't about the money or the rug for him. "Our concern is in children safety," he wrote via email. "Even if non-toxic, this dye can not be good in a baby's eyes, which is my son's favorite place to put them when he is tired, or internally when digested. Besides that, the amount that bled off this toy was unreal, I had never seen anything like that, and was horrified to think other parents may have to go through the jolt of this alarming event."

Requests for comment from Fisher-Price haven't been returned. There has been no recall of this annoyingly defective product.

He writes:

I'm not sure if this is really pertinent to your website but I just feel like venting right now...
I am a manager with Toys R Us and have been with the company for 10 years. Today on our weekly national
conference call it was announced that we will be open on Thanksgiving Day. This may not come as a shock
to the average consumer, but to a retail worker who only typically has three guaranteed days off a year (Easter, Thanksgiving, and Xmas) this was disturbing. It was presented to the stores as capitalizing on a competitive advantage. This information is supposed to be highly confidential but I just feel like calling bullshit on these arrogant corporate assholes who will be enjoying Thanksgiving with their families whilst the true workers will be working and preparing for the busiest shopping day of the year. Also, we will be opening at midnight Thanksgiving Day to enjoy another competitive advantage.

Signed,
Soon to be former Toys "R" Us Kid

Whatever Toys R Us honcho made this call must not only face guff from managers like the one who wrote us, but now will probably be visited by the ghosts of Thanksgivings past, present and future, which I'm pretty sure are totally freaky flying headless turkeys. So it's really that guy I feel bad for rather than the manager and employees.

Who's up for some Thanksgiving Day toy shopping?

(Photo: XISMZERO)

"Target fined over lead paint in toys" [Reuters]
(Photo: j.reed)

One of the predicted "hot" toys for this holiday season are Zhu Zhu Pets, adorable little robotic hamsters. Are they right for you and your family? As one of The Consumerist's leading hamster experts, I've assembled a handy chart to help you determine whether a robot or traditional hamster is right for you.

Arguably, the toy model is best for younger children who might lose interest in caring for and feeding a live hamster. For children who are true animal lovers, there is no comparison. These toys are recommended for children ages 4-10, and I'm not sure I'd recommend responsibility for an animal for most children that age.

It looks like the overall advantage goes to the robot hamsters. However, while discount and toy stores are already running out of Zhu Zhu Pets and their playsets, the analog version is rarely in short supply, and many different models can be found at your local animal shelter, via Craigslist, or in pet stores.

Also, here is a gratuitous picture of my hamsters.

Zhu Zhu Pets [Official Site]
Will a $10 Hamster Have Them Fighting in the Aisles? [CNBC]

Gwen, a limited-edition doll, is part of the backstory for Chrissa (what, you didn't know dolls had backstories?), who proves her worth by standing up for her "different" friends, including homeless Gwen and black Sonali.

Not surprisingly, homeless advocates have objected to the doll, and question the idea that including Gwen in the product line "kind of shows awareness to what's going on in the world," as one mother shopping in an American Girl boutique told a CBS correspondent.

There are between 7,000 and 10,000 homeless children in L.A. alone ... and it's doubtful many, if any, could afford Gwen's $95 price tag.

One homeless woman in a shelter ... said Gwen touched her heart when she saw the doll in its box. The women praised the doll ... until they learned Gwen isn't a fundraising device for the homeless. "I don't even see why you would make a homeless doll, anyway," one woman said ... unless it was being used to raise money to help charities aiding the homeless.

Advocates also worry that the "valuable lessons about life," which American Girl says are taught by the dolls, include the idea that it's okay to be homeless. Tanya Tull, president of Beyond Shelter, told CBS that she's "afraid that [girls are] going to pick up the idea that it's OK, that it's an accepted segment of society that some children are homeless and some children are not."

Of course, most children will probably miss the idea that Gwen is supposed to be homeless, given that she looks pretty much identical to every other American Girl doll, down to her "white eyelet lace dress with embroidered accents." But wait! It turns out Gwen can't even afford a full lineup of accessories; she has to make do with a "pink headband that doubles as a belt." Poor Gwen!

Update: Here's American Girl's response:

American Girl Statement

Since its inception in 1986, American Girl's historical and contemporary books have addressed a wide range of important social issues that have had a significant impact on the lives of girls and women. The contemporary 2009 Girl of the Year line, of which Gwen is a part, specifically addresses the issue of relational aggression or bullying, which has become a growing concern for girls and their parents today.

While our outreach in support of the line will continue to focus on preventing peer aggression, we are pleased to continue our ongoing partnership with HomeAid America and its mission to support the temporarily homeless. We will do so through a variety of fundraising initiatives, such as our ongoing commitment to Project Playhouse™, special fundraising events at American Girl retail stores, as well as direct grants.

HomeAid America Statement

HomeAid America, a leading national nonprofit provider of housing for today's homeless, is proud of its ongoing partnership with American Girl. Since 2006, we have worked with American Girl on HomeAid's Project Playhouse™, an annual key fundraising event that raises money and awareness for the organization's shelter development program.

As one of our signature partners, American Girl has demonstrated a high-level of commitment and passion to help us with our mission to build dignified housing where homeless families and individuals can rebuild their lives. We are pleased to continue our relationship with American Girl and look forward to our next fundraising project with them.

Jeffrey A. Slavin
CEO
HomeAid America, Inc.

Flap Over "Homeless" American Girl Doll [CBS]

"The 7 Most Inappropriate Products For Children" [Huffington Post] (Thanks to Daizy!)

"A Campaign With an Edge" [UglyDoggy via AgencySpy]

According to the Washington Post, the effort is part of what's expected to be an epic battle between the R crew, Walmart and other major retailers for the hearts, minds and wallets of America's parents.

...it's not the only retailer ramping up toy operations before Christmas. Sears has already installed permanent toy shops in 20 stores in New York, San Francisco, Los Angeles and Chicago. Behemoth discount retailer Wal-Mart said it is planning exclusives with popular licensed brands such as Bakugan and Transformers. "I think every lever that can be pulled will be pulled," said Anita Frazier, senior industry analyst for the market research firm NPD Group.

While retailers are hoping for a better season this year than last, that's far from certain. Toys R Us recently reported a drop in revenue for its latest quarter, as consumers remain reluctant to spring for high-priced toys.

Holiday blitz for Toys R Us [Washington Post]

(Photo: thewastedsmile)

Last night, our reader "w_mworker" said it was an official display campaign called "Family Fun Night":

There is also supposed to be board games and other family games next to the DVDs. (probably not noticed since they actually belong in the toy dept) The idea is one stop shopping for a cheap family night at home. By a board game, kid dvd and some snacks.

And guess what: today on Twitter, Walmart made an official announcement.

Walmart on Twitter (Thanks to m_worker and Travis!)

With no other options, he researched the e-mail addresses of the company's executive board and fired off a carefully crafted executive e-mail carpet bomb.

Dear Toys R Us Executive Committee,

My name is Seth M. and I am taking the unusual step of writing
you personally after having exhausting your normal customer service
options.

Back on July 6th I purchased a "Fast Lane Mutator" Radio Controlled
vehicle for my son. I paid $65.98 for it including sales tax. The
day after the purchase the main drive gear in the transmission
stripped out leaving us with an inoperable car. Inside the packaging
was a card telling us that in case of problems, not to return the toy
to the store but to e-mail, service_toysrus@yahoo.com. I did so and
quickly received an automated reply telling me that the address was no
longer good, thereby stripping me of that service option. I went to
the ToysRUs Website and after a little searching came up with a phone
number, 1-800-869-7787.

The guest relations staff at this number were very helpful, taking my
information and telling me that they would forward it onto the proper
people. They also gave me a case number [redacted]. About 15
minutes later, I received a call from another associate who was looking
to check my information and to gather some details that were missed in
my prior call. She told me that my problem would be forwarded to the
"Private Label Team", because the "Fast Lane" line of merchandise was
built as a Toys R Us house brand. She also said I should hear back
within 5 business days.

During the next two weeks I did not get a call.

Then, while my family and I were on vacation, I received a message from
someone, Daphne I believe, in "Corporate Guest Relations" requesting
that I return her call. We returned home August 8th and I was able to
call the number, 1-800-961-5984, on Monday the 10th. The associate
who answered said that they just wanted to let me know that my issue
had been forwarded onto the Private Label Team and that I should hear
back within three days. On Friday the 14th after hearing nothing I
called again to check up on the progress. I was told that they would
re-send it to the Private Label team and to expect to hear something
within 5 days.

It is now August 21st and another call was made. Again I was told
that they would re-send my case to the Private Label team. I asked
the associate if there were any other options for me as the sending of
my case to the Private Label team seems to have no effect. I was
given the name of Mr. Storch and the Corporate mailing address, with
the suggestion that I send him a letter.

This e-mail is the resultant letter.

Before moving on, I would like to tell you that at every step of the
way along your customer service chain, the men and women I spoke to
were polite and very willing to do whatever was in their power to help
me, this is commendable. However it seems that nobody I have spoken
to as of yet has the ability to actually resolve my issue.

My family and I often shop at ToysRUs, and would prefer to continue.
With our children it is definitely easier to have a toy in hand versus
a printout of a delivery confirmation. When I first started contacting
your company I was hoping to either receive a replacement part, or
vehicle. Unfortunately at this point I think that a full refund would
be the best way to resolve my problem.

I understand that it being late on a Friday, an immediate response may
be difficult. I look forward to hearing from you next week.

Thank you for your time,

Seth M.
[Phone number]
[E-mail address]

cc: http://www.consumerist.com

After reading his initial e-mail, we asked Seth how things turned out. The response to his EECB was immediate and quite impressive.

I wrote my initial e-mail on Friday evening. I received my first e-mail
reply from a member of the Toys R Us Executive Committee (the focus of my
e-mail) early Saturday morning. Shortly there after I was called by
Rachelle from Executive Relations who let me know that it being Saturday
there wasn't much that could be done until Monday. She did say that Toys R
Us would do whatever was needed to make things right. She said that a gift
card was the easiest for them but they could also mail me a check. She said
that she would call me on Monday to make all the arrangements. I told her
that a gift card would be fine.

I also received an e-mail from the Vice President of Operations Ms. Claire
Babrowski, letting me know that she would make sure everything was taken
care of.

Later Saturday Ms. Babrowski e-mailed me again after finding out that
Rachelle had already called me to arrange a resolution. Ms. Babrowski
wanted to make sure I was satisfied and asked that I keep her updated on the
status of everything. She also offered to, in addition to the gift card,
send my son a "zero gravity" RC toy to apologize for Toys R Us's failure.

I replied that my son would appreciate the toy and sent my address.

On Monday Rachelle called me to confirm my address for the gift card.

Tuesday morning the "apology" card arrived with a hand written apology from
Ms. Babrowski, much to my son's surprise and joy.

I as of yet have not received the gift card but have every expectation that
it is on its way.

I cannot thank the consumerist enough. It was via the various posts
regarding an EECB that I learned how to search for e-mail address formats
and how to write an appropriate concise letter. I did not expect such a
quick and complete response from Toys R Us.

What a great resolution! We're a bit concerned about the runaround Seth received when trying to replace the toy through regular channels, and hope that Toys R Us has taken this opportunity to fix the problems with their private label product support.

Do you have a customer service problem that can't be solved through the regular channels? Empower yourself with the information available here on Consumerist, starting with the Ultimate Guide To Fighting Back.

UPDATE: Seth just reported that he received a gift card for the total amount he paid for the car, plus $15.

"Secretly" is kind of an over-the-top word to use, right? Well, the Associated Press reports that when the CPSC voted to exempt Mattel,

CPSC issued no press release about the 3-0 vote in Mattel's favor, and information on the vote was not posted on the commission's Web site section pertaining to the CPSIA law.

[...]

The agency approved seven Mattel labs as "firewalled third party laboratories" - the first to get that designation under the new law, which permits the "firewall" exception. Mattel pushed hard for the firewalled labs provision when Congress was considering the legislation. The company spent more than $1 million in 2008 on lobbying, according to federal records.

"Third-party safety tests not required for Mattel" [Yahoo] (Thanks to Richard!)
(Photo: IntangibleArts)

The cool thing is you don't need a receipt, nor even to have bought the item at Toys R Us. And it doesn't even matter how old the item is, the L.A. Times reports:

During the Great Trade-In event, which begins Friday, all Babies R Us and Toys R Us stores nationwide will accept returns of used cribs, car seats, bassinets, strollers, travel systems, play yards and high chairs regardless of how old they are or where they were purchased.

In exchange, consumers will receive a 20% discount on any new item in those categories from 16 manufacturers including Cosco, Evenflo, Graco and Safety 1st. There is no limit on how many items customers can trade in.

A 20 percent discount isn't exactly a windfall, but for those who need financial motivation to rid their house of baby death traps, it's better than nothing.

Toys R Us' trade-in offer triggered by safety recalls [Los Angeles Times]
(Photo: AaronBBrown)

Sure is spooky stuff that not even Mulder and Scully could explain.

Enraged, they decided to make a video and blog about it, with help from Dad. He writes:

So, instead of wet fun on a hot summer day, we spent the day inside writing this little story and learning about Photoshop.  My children will need this skill if they're going to compete in the new global economy!

Viva media literacy!

Kmart Removes Fun, Leaves Bitter Disappointment for Young Children [Around Anderson]

I wanted an RC Helicopter for no reason other than not having been allowed to have one as a kid. I went to WalMart and ended up choosing the $59.95 Air Hogs model. When it came time to check out, the cashier scanned it and it rang up $59.95 AND $5.88 1-year protection plan. I told her I didn't want the protection plan, just the helicopter. She tries to void the $5.88 charge but the system will only let her void the $59.95. She canceled out the entire transaction and tried again. It still rang up both items and would only allow her to void one.

She called the Customer Service Manager over. The manager tried it as well and it kept forcing the protection plan when the helicopter was rung up and absolutely would not allow the $5.88 charge to be removed - even with a manager's override. They also tried ringing up a second Air Hogs that was priced the same and it also rang up with the protection plan. I told them not to worry about it as there was a Radio Shack across the street that had the same model at (amazingly) the same price.

The customer service manager told me to wait, rang up the helicopter (which rang up with the protection plan of course) then voided it (the system would ONLY allow the helicopter to be voided and not the protection plan) and asked how I was paying. I looked at the total.... She charged me only the $5.88 protection plan and voided off the $59.95 for the helicopter. I told her she didn't have to but she said it was fine. This is perhaps the best $5.88 I've spent in a long time. Thanks, WalMart!

Most excellent. Now, make sure that you have a lot of fun with that helicopter!

(Photo: Locutis)

During the doll's test period with a few canines, including the Maltese Flock (responsible for the idea), the pets showed a better quality of life based on less anxiety, less barking, and less territorial demarcation. In other words, the dogs live a better life, satisfying their repressed sexuality, in some cases for many years.

Don't make that face/sound. What, you'll scrape a PedEgg across your feet and get rid of your bingo arms with suggestive hand motions, but you turn prudish at an "easy to clean reservoir"? Fine, then maybe you need Scooty Pants dog underwear instead.

"'Adult toy' for dogs" [BoingBoing]
"How to Measure Your Dog for Their Scooty Pants" [Scooty-Pants.tripod.com]

The world's largest toy maker reported a profit of $21.5 million, or 6 cents a share, up from $11.8 million, or 3 cents a share, a year earlier. Revenue fell 19% to $898.2 million, with currency fluctuations accounting for five percentage points of the decline.

Analysts polled by Thomson Reuters most recently were looking for break-even results on revenue of $970 million.

The company doesn't typically provide financial guidance, but executives said they are on track to generate $90 million to $100 million of net cost savings in 2009 and $180 million to $200 million in savings by the end of 2010. And one advantage Mattel has heading into the critical holiday season that it didn't have a year ago is that the difficult environment won't come as a surprise, [Chairman and CEO Robert A.] Eckert said.

No, I suppose a weak holiday season wouldn't come as a surprise this year.

Mattel 2Q Profit Up; Cost Cuts Offset Weak Sales [Wall Street Journal]

(Photo: Ryan Holloway Photography)

The recalled items include:

• March 2009: 2,900 Baby Necessities pacifiers (choking hazard)
• Dec. 2008: 5,400 toy army figures (lead paint)
• Nov. 2008: 2,100 'Mini-Televisor' toys (lead paint)
• April 2008: 2,000 Interchange Robot toys (lead paint)
• Jan. 2008: 2,000 toy racing cars (lead paint)
• April 2007: 3,500 'Lovely Baby' and 'Happy Baby' dolls (choking hazard)

The penalty settlement, which has been provisionally accepted by the Commission, resolves CPSC staff allegations that from November 2007 through August 2008, OKK Trading knowingly imported and sold toys with paints that contained lead levels that exceeded legal limits. In 1978, a federal ban was put in place which prohibited toys and other children's articles from having more than 0.06 percent lead (by weight) in paints or surface coatings. Lead can be toxic if ingested by young children and can cause adverse health consequences.

The settlement also covers staff allegations that from May 2007 through December 2007, the company knowingly exported noncompliant toys in violation of federal notification requirements.

When asked to comment, OKK acknowledged that their conduct had not been OKK.

OKK Trading To Pay $665,000 Civil Penalty for Violating Federal Lead Paint Ban and Other Child Safety Rules [CPSC via Consumer Reports]

You can buy the gun with free shipping, but if you choose to add the offer for free ammo you end up paying for shipping anyway, making the armor not so free.

Chi writes about how he got suckered in:

Like many people I have seen the Nerf guns and thought they all looked cool. So there was a special going on with free shipping and extra ammo. So I thought I could waste $11 on a nerf gun. The shipping for just the gun is $5.04, which is waived because of free shipping. Now you get a free pack of nerf ammo with the purchase, though you have to pay shipping. Now shipping for them together is $5.08. So you would think you would have to pay sales tax and $.04 for shipping right? No, they lower your free shipping to $2.82 so that they squeeze a couple more dollars from you. Not a huge deal but strange how the system changes how much free shipping you get. Damn, guess I really want that Nerf gun.

Unless Chi's nearest Toys 'R' Us is more than $2.82 worth of gas away, his buyer's remorse is justified. But hey, don't feel too bad for him. He's got a Nerf gun and ammo and you don't.

"Mattel to Pay $2.3 Million Penalty for Toy Hazard" [Bloomberg]
(Photo: IntangibleArts)

But Mega, which was best known for its Lego-like Mega Bloks before it acquired Magnetix-maker Rose Art, faces odds of approximately 3,720 to 1 of besting its larger adversary. The once-successful company is now laboring under a debt load of almost $400 million, and has been trying to sell off the non-Magnetix remains of Rose Art for over a year. The Globe and Mail lays out the state of the epic battle with analysis from onlookers like Scotia Capital's Anthony Zicha:

"It's a really sad story," says Zicha. ... "There's always a chance it will survive, but the likelihood is not great." In the toy business, says Zicha, "you have to have consumer confidence. If you break the relationship between the consumer and the retailer, you're pretty much done." Mega broke that rule, and it may pay with its life.

As much as we'd like to think that John-117 is up to it, he may just be backing the wrong side in this battle.

The Empire Strikes Back [Globe and Mail]

(Photo: brcake)

My Fox Tampa Bay says that the boy told his mother, who then called Walmart.

"I showed it to my mom, and I ran back to my room…she said I'm not in trouble," the boy told Fox.

Walmart, however, was in trouble.

"I explained the situation [to the Walmart manager] and his response was, well bring the machine down and we'll let your son pick out a new game. And I was like, no I don't think you heard what I said," Mom said in an interview.

Walmart says they're looking into the situation and are "concerned." The accidental porn viewers say they would just like an apology and to exchange the used (ew) PSP for a new one.

Child finds porn on PSP [My Fox Tampa Bay] (Thanks, Andrew !)

Christopher writes:

Recently, my daughter (age 7) and I discovered the strategy employed by the makers of Webkinz to perpetuate their sales, by taking advantage of kids' desires to maintain their virtual pets by having to purchase more and more Webkinz stuffed animals.

Webkinz, of course, are cute stuffed animals that allow kids to create an online version of their pet, then roam around in a virtual Webkinz world. You buy the stuffed animal in a store, and receive a code to logon to their website and see your pet "come to life" in the virtual Webkinz world.

What is buried in the user's agreement is that the log on is only good for one year, at which time you have to buy another pet to keep access to your previous pets. Buying 2 pets at the same time only gives you a year, as the time is not additive; it begins when you register your pet.

After my daughter discovered she could not log on, and I looked within the user's agreement, and found the problem, and their "solution." Of course, my daughter immediately wanted to go and buy another animal. I emailed the company expressing my dismay at their strategy, and received a standard email back regarding purchasing another toy to log in.

I am hoping that other consumers write you about this unethical strategy.

What do you think? Are Webkinz a form of evil? Or is a year's subscription fair?

"Toy Fair 09 Video Preview: Elmo Tickle Hands" [NonToxicReviews]

The doll plays "You Are My Sunshine" when you push her belly, so luckily you don't have to be sad when you look at your new Caylee doll. You do have to be one sick, creepy fool, however.

Asked about whether it's appropriate for his company profit on Caylee's death, Salcedo said he is anticipating critics.

"I think that that is going to come up," he said.

Salcedo said the public does not understand what it costs to make the doll, ship it, import it, and his company's expenses.

Yes, it's definitely expensive to make and sell toys these days. Here's an idea: just cancel it altogether. Problem solved, and you might even repair a little fragment of your shredded, soot-stained soul, Jaime.

Seriously, don't sell dolls of murdered children. It's effed up.

"The Caylee Marie Anthony tribute doll" [Orlando Sentinel] (Thanks to Craig!)
Showbiz Promotions storefront

Toy and Product Recall Finder [Parents.com]

We were unable to find the actual votes on the CPSC's site, but we assume they were on these four proposed exemptions (PDFs). According to the L.A. Times, the CPSC agreed to exempt:

• Items with lead parts that a child cannot access
• Clothing, toys and other goods made of natural materials such as cotton and wood; and
• Electronics that are impossible to make without lead

If your fears still aren't assuaged, take heart: the CPSC is underfunded and can't afford to come after your Etsy store:

Whether federal regulators will enforce the rules—which might entail inspections at thousands of secondhand stores and toy shops across the country—is another question.

"The CPSC is an agency with limited resources and tremendous responsibility to protect the safety of families," said Scott Wolfson, a CPSC spokesman. "Our focus will be on those areas we can have the biggest impact and address the most dangerous products."

Regulators Rethink Rules on Testing Children's Clothing and Toys for Lead [LA Times]
(Photo: jalexchasick)
PREVIOUSLY: Consumers Union Asks Nancy Nord, CPSC To Do A Better Job Explaining These New Toy Testing Rules
New Toy Safety Rule Has Collateral Damage: Handmade Toy Manufacturers

In this letter (PDF) sent to CPSC chair Nancy Nord, and released to the public, Consumers Union and a bunch of other consumer interest groups ask the CPSC to please do its part to clear up all the confusion over the coming Toy Testing Apocalypse. Don't want to read the whole thing? Here's a much shorter summary:

• The CPSC has the power to explain how smaller retailers and manufacturers should follow the new rules when they go into effect, but so far it hasn't;
• The CPSC should publish hard data on the real cost of testing, to help reduce the amount of misinformation circulating online;
• Consumers Union feels smaller manufacturers shouldn't automatically be exempt based solely on size, since company size doesn't guarantee a product will be safe.

As we mentioned before, the Consumer Product Safety Improvement Act (CPSIA) that Congress passed last year requires any product intended for use by kids to be tested before it can go to market, which has a lot of smaller businesses wondering if they're going to be out of business in the coming months as the law is enacted.

The CPSC can do a lot more than it's done so far to explain the law to businesses, but other than releasing "some preliminary information regarding exclusions to the lead standard" on December 24th, its been largely silent. Why? It might be a political maneuver on Nancy Nord's part, which is what I suspect this final paragraph is hinting at:

Our children deserve the safest products possible. The bipartisan law approved by Congress in 2008 provides that safety. It would be tragic if your Commission, by failing to provide the appropriate guidance and exemptions, failed to effectuate this important new law.

Or, everyone at the CPSC might just be slow to react due to lead poisoning from too many tainted charm bracelets or something.

"CPSIA Clarification Letter" [Consumers Union]
(Photo: Intangible Arts)

Just wanted to let y'all know about an experience we had this Christmas. My 5-year-old received a "Kid-Tough Digital Camera" by Fisher-Price as a present from a relative. I let her play with it and take 50 or so pictures (yow!). When I hooked the camera up to my XP PC via the included USB cable, my anti-virus software instantly announced it had protected me from a virus. Good for me! I carefully formatted the built-in memory stick on the camera.

I checked Fisher-Price's website for recall info, but there was none. I also searched the Mattel service website with the keyword "virus" and got some hits for MegaMan games but nothing else. Sadly, there is NO electronic method for submitting any feedback on their website! If you have any sort of product issue you need to call an 800 number. I just called it today and was told they couldn't answer my call right now due to high volume and disconnected me. Yep, I wasn't even given the *option* to wait in a queue.

Personally, I'm not that upset [about] it because nothing infected my PC. I mostly want an explanation for this and of course to make sure the company was aware of the issue. But I am definitely annoyed that they have made it so I'll have to call over and over again until I finally get someone.

P.S. Did a websearch on "fisher-price kid tough camera virus" on Christmas day and got like one or two hits. Do it now and you find a LOT of people with surprise viruses! That's what we get for entrusting all our manufacturing to China...

Well you wouldn't take the leaded paint or the melamine, Jeff. China has to export something...

Update: This CBS station in Minneapolis has slightly more information on the story.