I compare this to how 'the world' makes coloring books. Even with characters like Batman and Superman, where there would be violence in their actual stories (comics, movies, etc.), they have better sense than to make a Joker coloring book where he's slaughtering people with toxic gas. It's just common sense not to do that.
Why not use the same reasoning as for not wearing a cross here? If a faithful JW lost his mate in a grisly death, even if she was unfaithful, would you make a coloring book page out of her crime scene photo and have your kids connect the dots? It would be very upsetting.
Think of this. In the resurrection, Lot would presumably come back, and how would he feel if he sees this image--the death of his wife as a kids' drawing activity? At best, this would be grossly offensive to him, as surely her death would have grieved him greatly. But that's where we hit a wall of reality, isn't it? Because you see, maybe, maybe not even the Society expects to see Lot again. If their teachings were real to them, I can't see them in good conscience approving such usage of this woman's death.
Oooh, wait...what am I thinking? When it comes to cold-hearted stuff, the Society is absolute zero. So this isn't any more barbaric than the actual deaths they are directly responsible for, is it?
--sd-7