'wil', what an obnoxious mis-informed anti-Christian rant! Christian organisations (including ACL) routinely get out and fight for people on the streets doing it tough. This happens to be another issue that many of us find very relevant. I don't want to have to explain to my kids why we have a photo of some twit shiving his tackle up a pigs backside out for all to see. If you must use that image, put it in a sealed magazine that my family can then choose (or not) to see. Lyle is spot on withe the opinion that 'self regulation' in advertising (an industry in which I work) has failed. He's pointing that out - along with looking after a whole range of other issues that you might think are more important.

'Arthur N' says: "I am quite sure that the management of Foxtel didn't sit down and ask "what is the most offensive, innocence destroying thing we can put onto a billboard?" Lapses of judgement (and yes even good taste) do happen. Sometimes things slip through the inevitable gaps." Wake up! I work in marketing and can guarantee you that this was no 'slip'. It was calculated and pre-meditated to gain maximum exposure. Think about it, why else would Foxtel ads promoting the show in question suddenly appear alongside articles on the issue? You think they magically appeared as an afterthought? Foxtel did this on purpose, and the Outdoor Ad industry is right with them on it!

I can see no case whatsoever for destroying the innocence of children, simply to satisfy the money faced greed of patent morons.
Children must be allowed to mature at a natural rate, and have their questions answered honestly, but only when they ask and then given only that information specific to their inquiry.
We do have to maintain, what could be called community standards, and a line beyond which no decent civilised community can cross.
I don't have a problem with exposed breasts, given they are the oldest drinking vessel in the world, and one of the first things I was exposed to, after leaving the womb. [Pass the udder udder to my udder brudder.]
One would imagine a very different level of ramped up volumetric community outrage, if there had of been a simulated role reversal and the porker were placed behind the man, or almost unthinkable, a woman?
If we allow this thin end of the wedge obscenity; via self regulation, where do our falling community standards stop!? [Its not the fall/long drop that hurts, but the sudden stop at the bottom.]
Are we heading/hurtling headlong towards a future, where absolutely anything goes, and no image is too graphic, in the greedy quest for the almighty dollar? [Money faced greed must be an addiction like alcoholism surely, where one drink is one too many and a thousand never enough!]
And think, moving image 3D holograms are already here, if still relatively rare or uncommon! Not so digitised surround sound!
Self regulation has clearly failed, and not just in this area, but where gambling is concerned as well. But particularly in sport, which now calls into question, fair and honest, illicit drug free, competition?
And what about those kids that were encouraged by patent unscrupulous stealth, to run up phone bills of thousands, while playing supposedly free online games!
We really do need to turn a complete 180, and refocus on still unmet need, rather than completely vacuous greed.
Given, that the advertising referred to, illustrates monumental greed, as well as anything could!?
Rhrosty.

Peter Singer a philosopher (intellectual)- well that says it all.Whether he said bestiality is fine I cannot comment but if he did then I can assure him that 99.9% of Australians say it is not - Christian or non -Christian. No excuses here, surely there own moral conscience should of told them that to promote the ad was wrong and would cause an outrage or maybe that was the whole intention. The world is sick enough without further promotions of depravity.

McReal,

I thought you would be interested in the, like you say "challenging philosophies" of Peter Singer:

Atheist Peter Singer argues in favor of infanticide. Here are some choice Singer quotations on the subject from his books “Rethinking Life and Death and Writings on an Ethical Life”

On how mothers should be permitted to kill their offspring until the age of 28 days: “My colleague Helga Kuhse and I suggest that a period of twenty-eight days after birth might be allowed before an infant is accepted as having the same right to life as others.”

On why abortion is less morally significant than killing a rat: “Rats are indisputably more aware of their surroundings, and more able to respond in purposeful and complex ways to things they like or dislike, than a fetus at ten or even thirty-two weeks gestation.”

On why pigs, chickens and fish have more rights to life than unborn humans: “The calf, the pig, and the much-derided chicken come out well ahead of the fetus at any stage of pregnancy, while if we make the comparison with a fetus of less than three months, a fish would show more signs of consciousness.”

On why infants aren’t normal human beings with rights to life and liberty: “Characteristics like rationality, autonomy and self-consciousness…make a difference. Infants lack these characteristics. Killing them, therefore, cannot be equated with killing normal human beings.”

Read more here: http://townhall.com/columnists/dineshdsouza/2008/05/12/atheism_and_child_murder

Atheism and Child Murder, Dinesh D’Souza

Captain Kuhle, I am very awake thank you. I am also very well aware of the BS games played by marketer, such as yourself.

But are seriously trying to tell me that the marketers at Foxtel sat around and asked themselves "How can we destroy the innocence of youth today?" Seriously, is that what you are saying?!? Are you saying that marketers, such as yourself, are evil creatures lurking in the shadows waiting to pounce and steal happy childhoods? Seriously?

Because that is basically what this article is trying to say.

Is it possible that this was planned? Yes.
Is it possible that this was a slip? Yes.
Is it possible that a newspaper editor has placed the stories next to the adds to boost circulation? Hell Yes!

It’s a poorly written article, trying to evoke an emotional response by bringing up the spector of the evil marketer trying to destroy childhood. Like some sort of vampire who feeds on innocence. It's just a poorly written article by someone with a vested interest.