Even if they aren't Sandy Hook kids, and even if the way to get them crying was just to give them a lollipop and remove it (http://www.slate.com/blogs/behold/2013/08/04/jill_greenberg_end_times_crying_children_photos_became_a_headache_for_the.htmthe kids are all naked for as much of them as you can see. That in itself seems beyond strange.

"But in general, Greenberg said the controversy is overblown. “Making children cry for a photographer can be considered mean. But I would say that making children laugh and show off their jeans for an apparel ad is just as exploitative and less natural. Toddlers’ natural state, like 30 percent of the time, is crying, and it doesn't indicate pain or suffering,” Greenberg said."

Yep making kids dress for ads is exploitative and the fact that it is done doesn't excuse exploiting them for financial gain by making them cry for the camera.