I, too, think the blobby cartoon monster was misplaced, mostly because it's not the faceless stranger that usually molests but someone the child knows and trusts. While that fact was mentioned by the father or mother ("Even if it's someone you know!" or something to that effect), it was undermined by the visual image of the "scary" monster, with the implication that molesters are, well, scary. And they often aren't, at least, not initially. But, on the other hand, how do you convey that in a video for a small child?
No, that aspect of the whole thing wasn't the worst. It was what BoC said about using the idea of the child's conscience, as if the child was some kind of willing participant. Yikes. Your conscience protects you from deliberately doing something wrong, NOT from a grown up pervert. So it's the same old blame-the-victim strategy, albeit dressed in a smaller size.
And what was with whipping out that old Awake on the New Morality? I couldn't believe it. Do these dunderheads REALLY think child abuse is tied up with the so-called new morality of the 60s and 70's? That it's just one more alternative lifestyle, like being gay? Correct me, someone, if this is wrong but isn't it (child molestation, not being gay) considered a psychological disorder? Admittedly, being gay once was considered a disorder and criminal and that's all changed. But the key difference is that the gay relationship is one of knowledge and consent, and that's not the case with child abuse.
I don't have the stomach to watch the broadcasts but I was visiting family members who eagerly put it on and ate it up as Jehovah's wonderful provision. Yeesh.