Brooklyn novelty shop reeling from ‘surreal’ row with Kelly Clarkson over mechanical bird
Kelly Clarkson’s complaint that a Brooklyn novelty shop treated her as though she could not afford a mechanical bird has drawn widespread attention to the small business. Art of Play says the bird she asked about is fixed to the wall and not for sale, and disputes her account of the brief visit.
The shop says staff offered an identical bird for $15,000 and another singing bird for $2,000, while Clarkson said she was told the wall-mounted bird cost $15,000 and was offered something comparable. The store reported threats and harassment after her post; Molly now has a joking $15 million price tag. Video released this week appears to show Clarkson discussing the bird with an employee, but has no audio.
- Kelly Clarkson criticised a Brooklyn shop over a mechanical bird.
- Art of Play says the wall display is not for sale.
- The dispute brought crowds, media attention and reported harassment.
New here? Start with this
Art of Play is a small novelty shop in Brooklyn that sells unusual toys, games and objects, including mechanical birds that move or sing. Kelly Clarkson is a singer and television presenter whose comments can reach a large audience.
The disagreement centres on what happened when Clarkson asked about a bird fixed to the shop wall. The shop says that bird was not for sale and that staff offered other birds at different prices; Clarkson described being quoted $15,000 for a comparable bird.
The episode shows how a brief encounter can draw intense attention when a well-known person shares their account online. The shop says the attention brought threats and harassment, raising questions about the effects on small businesses when a public dispute spreads widely.
Both sides, in good faith
The strongest fair case each way — we don't pick a winner.
The case for
Clarkson’s account raises a reasonable concern that a customer may have been given the impression that an expensive item was the only comparable option, and that the interaction felt dismissive. A brief, silent video cannot establish what was said or how the exchange came across, so her description deserves consideration rather than being dismissed.
The case against
The shop says the bird Clarkson asked about was fixed to the wall and not for sale, and that staff offered other birds at different prices, including an identical one for $15,000 and another for $2,000. That account suggests a possible misunderstanding about which bird was being discussed, while the silent video does not resolve the disagreement; the shop also has a fair interest in correcting claims that may harm its small business.