Earlier this month, Mattel released a new and improved Dora the Explorer. The new Dora was welcomed with criticism from parents and consumers who demanded that Dora remain the same lovable young character.
Mattel defended the change by stating that they would not replace the old Dora, but simply wanted to appeal to an older demographic of young girls who could relate to this more mature Dora.
The new Dora has long hair down to her waist, a short dress with leggings underneath, and bears little resemblance to her predecessor. It appears she is more dressed for a shopping mall than exploring the outdoors.
The uproar from the parents is not surprising. No one wants their child to grow up too fast. However, no one can blame Mattel for wanting to keep up with a growing demographic who is catered to by Bratz dolls and Barbie dolls with tattoos (but that’s another blog post).
The more important issue is that young girls have a good role model. In my opinion, the new Dora will still be that. If Mattel wants to target 5-8 year old girls, I see no harm in the new Dora. She’s still a young, bilingual girl that children can learn from.
When I was a little girl, we had Barbie dolls and Polly Pockets, as well as the Spice Girls and Britney Spears. Today it’s Bratz dolls and Hannah Montana. I think Dora the Explorer should be the least of parents’ worries these days.
What do you think? Is marketing letting kids grow up too fast? Or are we just responding to what the kids want?
This is a very interesting question that I didn’t have an immediate answer for (which is rare for me).
It’s strange because it’s completely logical that they’d let the character grow and mature along with the growing girls (and boys) still enamored with the character. That said, I’m not entirely sure it’s the right decision.
The reason is this – If Nickelodeon doesn’t plan to change the character in their programming (in terms of her look and, frankly, the content of the show itself (adventures, level of maturity in the show, etc.), then I think it’s actually a bad idea. They are then marketing a toy product to 5-8 year old girls for a show that has content aimed at 2-5 year old girls (or whatever the age demographic of the show is). If that’s the case and the character of the show doesn’t mature like her product line does, then the disconnect is eventually going to show itself and leave the mature girls not *wanting* the toys for a “kids show.” I wouldn’t go so far as to say that the younger girls (and boys) won’t want Dora the Explorer toys, even if they don’t look the same, because I think a 2-5 year old girl is going to want a Dora the Explorer toy whether it matches the TV Dora or not, but it’s still a questionable decision.
There’s a reason Cabbage Patch Kids didn’t go into a line of “Cabbage Patch Teens” in order to appeal to their market share of girls growing into adulthood (as far as I know…maybe they did…I played with G.I. Joe’s and X-Men toys, so I wouldn’t know…because I’m a man and that’s what men play…ed…with…), and the reason Cabbage Patch Teens didn’t exist or didn’t last is because there was no connection for them between growing girls who didn’t want to play with “kid toys” as they grew.
That may be too drastic an approach, saying that older girls won’t care if they “update” or “mature” the toy line because they won’t have a connection with the show anymore, but that’s where I see it becoming a problem for Mattel in the future.
Anyway, I’ve gotta go play G.I. Joe’s in my roo…I mean…work on some social media stuff for Deep Bench…
Sorry for the blog post. Which I might actually turn into a blog post later.
I can see where Mattel is coming from in wanting to have an older toy for older kids, but I think what it comes down to is that they want to sell their product to more kids. But Mike’s right, since Dora doesn’t grow up in the show, it’s going to be hard to continue to sell these dolls to older girls who no longer watch it. (Though, I can see a huge benefit in having a more tween-age Dora show, but a different character, like her older cousin, Dalila.)
I think theire best bet is hoping parents buy this doll before their daughters are done with liking Dora. And honestly, I don’t think many parents will buy a more mature doll like this one for their 5 year old.
I appreciate that Dora is dressed modestly and still has a little bit of that “baby fat” she has in the show, but she no longer looks like an adventurer, which (in my opinion) is part of her directive. Now, she looks like a boy-crazy girl who loves to shop and is no longer interested in what’s in her backpack.
Good idea, I just don’t think they’ll see the sales they’re hoping for.
Thanks for the input guys, I agree with a lot of what you both have to say.
I think the idea that this new Dora will target 5-8 year olds is a little extreme. It would be different if they left Dora the way she was, and had her older cousin more focused on for the ‘older’ demographic.
What surprised me most about the change is the fact that Dora is so successful the way she is already. My 3-year old cousin loves Dora and Diego, and obviously is not old enough to appreciate the tween Dora.
It’s almost like they’re making this Dora represent a whole other show entirely, while Dora the Explorer continues to be a hit.