Another reason why having the best domain is essential?

[seemly]

I spotted this the other day, but didn't think to share it.

Mattel (toy maker) added a link to www.wicked.com (a porn site) instead of www.WickedMovie.com on their franchise doll packaging.

"There’s a website listed on the toy box, but instead of linking to the webpage for the movie adaptation of the Tony-winning musical, starring Cynthia Erivo and Ariana Grande, Mattel has mistakenly listed the URL to a pornographic website."

Mattel’s ‘Wicked’ Movie Dolls Mistakenly List Porn Site on Packaging

The packaging of Mattel's 'Wicked' movie dolls include the address to a pornographic website.

variety.com

 

[seemly]

Also - maybe we could do with a non-uk domain forum category for non-uk domain related news?

 

[Hook]

This is one of the biggest fuckups of all times... clearly this should be recalled WW...

 

[seemly]

I've worked in companies that design product packaging (pharmaceutical), and I've seen the numerous sign-off stages prior to print. Clearly the same safeguarding's aren't in place for kids toys - which is pretty piss poor.

This should have (obviously) never happened.

It may sound overly dramatic, but the mental impact of this sort of thing can be irreparable. Heads really should roll, with a substantial compensation package put in place for counselling.

 

[ben]

Surely there should be more safeguarding not less. Pretty bad this. But I don't think kids are going to be going to any domain name to be honest. But maybe I am disconnected. Kids these days have phones at age 8

 

[rb5]

Similar happened not too long ago: https://techcrunch.com/2023/09/01/l...ks-after-website-on-packaging-displayed-porn/

 

[Lee]

Whilst this situation is bad I don't think many kids will be visiting the domain on the packet. Why?

1. Most kids will rip open the doll either on Xmas day or birthday etc and the packet will get thrown out.
2. Most ISPs block porn by default. I'm not sure how many people apply to an ISP or mobile network to get them to unlock adult content but doubt many do tbh. I never have

 

[ben]

ISP do not auto block porn, but you can enable the filters. I remember back in the good old days of GPRS and Orange, BT Mobile etc. they did used to block adult content by default.

 

[Lee]

ISP do not auto block porn, but you can enable the filters. I remember back in the good old days of GPRS and Orange, BT Mobile etc. they did used to block adult content by default.

Thanks for the info.

For some reason I thought they did!

TBH, I've not had broadband for 7 years now since moving to rural country. I can only use 4G and I know on both Voda and EE adult stuff is blocked by default. Just tested going on Onlyfans using both networks and it did not let me!

 

[astutiumRob]

The default setting of all consumer isps is standard blocking/filtering ( and constant monitoring/reporting/logging ) on.

That can be upped a level ( or 2 in some cases ) based on request by the account holder or limited 3rd parties.

It can be dropped 1 or 2 levels on request, but AFAICR not completely turned off.

Mobile providers follow similar rules, and business accounts generally default to the min levels out of the box.

 

[Jeff]

This is one of the biggest fuckups of all times... clearly this should be recalled WW...

It may sound overly dramatic, but the mental impact of this sort of thing can be irreparable.

Yes, it's quite possibly the worst thing to have happened throughout human history.

More seriously, sure it's a cock-up, but hardly worthy of all the pearl-clutching, both here and in the MSM.

Firstly, if the barcode is a standard 20mm high, then the offending URL's font is about 2mm. Like @ben says, I doubt that anyone's little princess is going to even notice it, let alone copy it into the address bar of a browser. The child will be focused on the toy, not some tiny lettering on the packaging.

Secondly, even if a child did access this website, the home page is so tame that I can't see them being harmed by it. You have to get your card out to see anything worthwhile, which a child wouldn't be able to do.

And thirdly, any child who's savvy enough to copy the URL into the address bar is also quite capable of finding far more explicit (and free) material all by themselves.

In short, I think this is a load of fuss over virtually nothing.

 

[Hook]

Yes, it's quite possibly the worst thing to have happened throughout human history.

More seriously, sure it's a cock-up, but hardly worthy of all the pearl-clutching, both here and in the MSM.

Firstly, if the barcode is a standard 20mm high, then the offending URL's font is about 2mm. Like @ben says, I doubt that anyone's little princess is going to even notice it, let alone copy it into the address bar of a browser. The child will be focused on the toy, not some tiny lettering on the packaging.

Secondly, even if a child did access this website, the home page is so tame that I can't see them being harmed by it. You have to get your card out to see anything worthwhile, which a child wouldn't be able to do.

And thirdly, any child who's savvy enough to copy the URL into the address bar is also quite capable of finding far more explicit (and free) material all by themselves.

In short, I think this is a load of fuss over virtually nothing.

Completely immaterial to the facts, literally everything you written. Porn website listed on child's doll packaging.

Why don't we just start printing porn and giving it to children instead? Won't be an issue seems as they can access it themselves online - or maybe we make it a little harder and put it in a QR, at least then only the kids who are tech savvy will see it! (not that I think that makes any difference?)

If you as an adult buy something for your child, you don't expect it to have a domain (which is only TEN characters) which hosts porn.

And the website is not SFW, not matter how much you try and downplay it.

 

[Jeff]

Completely immaterial to the facts, literally everything you written. Porn website listed on child's doll packaging.

Why don't we just start printing porn and giving it to children instead? Won't be an issue seems as they can access it themselves online - or maybe we make it a little harder and put it in a QR, at least then only the kids who are tech savvy will see it! (not that I think that makes any difference?)

If you as an adult buy something for your child, you don't expect it to have a domain (which is only TEN characters) which hosts porn.

And the website is not SFW, not matter how much you try and downplay it.

Sorry, but I just don't share your outrage.

I would regard it as far more serious if it had been recalled because of a detachable part that posed a choking hazard. But I suspect that wouldn't have attracted anyway near as much publicity. Not salacious enough.

As for "Why don't we just start printing porn and giving it to children instead?" that's just a straw man.

 

[ben]

Sorry, but I just don't share your outrage.

I would regard it as far more serious if it had been recalled because of a detachable part that posed a choking hazard. But I suspect that wouldn't have attracted anyway near as much publicity. Not salacious enough.

As for "Why don't we just start printing porn and giving it to children instead?" that's just a straw man.

Same, and I have children. It’s just not that dramatic. I have never, in my life, as a kid or teenager, looked at the box and thought “I wonder what this is”

 

[seemly]

Yes, it's quite possibly the worst thing to have happened throughout human history.

More seriously, sure it's a cock-up, but hardly worthy of all the pearl-clutching, both here and in the MSM.

Firstly, if the barcode is a standard 20mm high, then the offending URL's font is about 2mm. Like @ben says, I doubt that anyone's little princess is going to even notice it, let alone copy it into the address bar of a browser. The child will be focused on the toy, not some tiny lettering on the packaging.

Secondly, even if a child did access this website, the home page is so tame that I can't see them being harmed by it. You have to get your card out to see anything worthwhile, which a child wouldn't be able to do.

And thirdly, any child who's savvy enough to copy the URL into the address bar is also quite capable of finding far more explicit (and free) material all by themselves.

In short, I think this is a load of fuss over virtually nothing.

I dunno. Using the web archive and going back to earlier this year (February 2024), the hero banner is quite a bit more graphic. So you're ability to risk asses edge cases is questionable. Good job you don't work for an insurance company!

It could well be that wicked.com have some kind of financial agreement in place to reduce the graphic nature of the home page for a period of time while the recall is in place.

I'd also like to state that just because your test case of 2 people on this forum (you and @ben), who are both adults, don't understand the damage porn does to society as a whole, but more so on the development of young children, it doesn't make it any less serious.

Edge cases are still valid and relevant, and this one was 100% avoidable.

 

[ben]

All this talk of edging has me uncomfortable

 

[Hook]

Sorry, but I just don't share your outrage.

I would regard it as far more serious if it had been recalled because of a detachable part that posed a choking hazard. But I suspect that wouldn't have attracted anyway near as much publicity. Not salacious enough.

As for "Why don't we just start printing porn and giving it to children instead?" that's just a straw man.

Your whole argument is a strawman - I just countered with it.

Lot of people out there who are fine with introducing children to sexuality and porn young, I just don't subscribe to this ideology.

 

[Tricky]

It gets worse if you look closely

 

[diablo]

Surprised this is even being debated.

This was completely avoidable.

And is completely unacceptable.

Withdraw the product. Take the hit. Move on.