In a move that has sparked controversy, toy company Mattel recently distributed free Barbie and Ken dolls to 700 schools across the UK as part of its “Barbie School of Friendship” program. The initiative aims to teach empathy to children through role-play exercises using iconic dolls.
According to BMJ, Mattel claims that research it sponsored demonstrates the positive impact of playing with dolls on child development, particularly in nurturing social skills like empathy. However, critics have raised concerns about the potential negative effects of using Barbie dolls, such as perpetuating gender stereotypes and promoting unhealthy body image ideals.
Experts in child development and public health have criticized the program, questioning the validity of using research to justify a marketing campaign targeted at children. Some argue that companies like Mattel, primarily focused on maximizing profits, are not experts in children’s health or education. Moreover, the materials provided to schools are heavily branded, raising questions about the use of “stealth marketing” tactics in educational settings.
The teaching materials distributed by Mattel included a package of 12 Barbie and Ken dolls, lesson plans, guides for teachers, flashcards, certificates, stickers, and promotional leaflets for a competition. While some teachers appreciated the free resources, others expressed concern about the potential exploitation of children and the presence of commercial branding in schools.
The central claim of the program is based on neuroscience research conducted in collaboration with Cardiff University. The research showed higher brain activity in children playing with Mattel dolls compared to those playing games on electronic tablets. However, critics argue that the research findings do not necessarily translate into long-term developmental benefits or behavioral effects.
Mattel’s marketing partner, SUPER, defended the program, stating that the scientific research was important for the campaign’s credibility and that the materials contained no direct sales messages. Despite the criticism, Mattel considers the initiative a success and plans to expand it to other markets, citing the underfunding of education as a reason for schools seeking partnerships with commercial companies.
The Department of Education for England has refused to comment on whether it evaluated the program and emphasized that schools have the autonomy to introduce educational materials they deem appropriate. Critics and concerned experts believe that the Barbie School of Friendship program highlights the need for greater scrutiny and regulation of marketing practices in educational environments.
While some teachers have found value in using the dolls to facilitate discussions on important topics, the broader debate centers on the ethical implications of corporations infiltrating schools with branded materials and whether such initiatives genuinely serve the best interests of children’s development. As the debate continues, the broader public awaits further responses from educational authorities and policymakers on this issue.
