Well, I’m not saying you’re a pervert if you think this is creepy or paedo, but I gotta say - I don’t see it. It’s an extremely bad commercial, sure, but that just means it’s in good company.
A “Connected” sign on a unicycle? Seriously - what am I supposed to find creepy here?
This would just be to much fun to handle 
Thanks for the laugh
Even funnier… a little girls ass… connected… Guy connecting to the internet… ok, fine… Kansas? Red Slippers?
I didn’t get anything creepy from the ad. The girl’s wearing leggings, in the last shot you see her from the back so no “crotchular” area, you don’t even see the shape of her ass or anything because of the skirt, and I didn’t see any connection between the “connected” plate and anything sexual.
I think the outrage is quite a stretch.
You know, the more I think about this, the more I find it completely ridiculous that anyone is finding this ad inappropriate.
There is no ‘crotch shot’ as people are suggesting. Folks seem over-eager to describe the picture in a sexual way. It’s a girl on a unicycle, and for about .5 seconds the ad zooms in on the sign hanging from the seat.
Frankly, I think people need to get real. There is nothing sexual or sexualized going on in the ad. A kid’s bare legs are not an inappropriate thing to show or to see, unless they’re being specifically displayed as sexual. Which these are not.
To all the people that are doing the “I’m more enlightened than you” SDMB thing and claiming that they don’t see anything inappropriate: you people need to get organized. Hold some meetings, make up some picket signs, and go protest the Japanese government’s effort to legislate morality.
Er, no, I can if I look really hard for it now that other posters have said what to look for see what they’re talking about.
But for that to spring into someone’s head on seeing the advert… I don’t think it’s going overboard to call it repressed paedophilia actually.
This isn’t an endorsement that the advert makes any sense, incidentally.
The Nimbus 2000 thing Sampiro linked to, on the other hand… that isn’t paedophillic, but it’s certainly pretty funny 
Now marked as “Private” and no longer available on YouTube
I think if you’ve come a point where people are buying used underwear out of a vending machine, maybe your social problems are a bit deeper then the actual vending machines.
“They’ve” been using sex to sell for longer than I’ve been around. In the last five years or so I notice a lot more deviant type sexual references.
The problem with pointing this sort of thing out is apparent here. Some people are disingenous.
Other people are clueless. Some people are metaphor-blind. Probably has to do with which hemisphere of the brain is being used, the business half or the artistic half.
In fact I can see this scenario at the office. Big boss money man to second in line: “Man, we gotta keep hiring Peter to do our ads. I don’t know what it is about his work, but it always grabs me in some way I can’t quite put my finger on.” Heh.
No double entendre intended. 
I am female, straight and not at all attracted to people younger than me, let alone teenies, and even I can see that whoever had this idea was pretty clueless. I don’t need to drool over that kid to know that the ad can be misinterpreted, and you’d better not get your ads misinterpreted in that way.
Just saying.
When I click on the OP’s link, I am taken to a YouTube page with a bunch of videos that do not seem to relate, and a message that says, “This video is private,” so I can’t comment. Is there another way to view the object in question?
Why don’t you have a seat over here . . .
I have no idea what that means.
So google it.
OK, you assholes, I know who Chris Hansen is, and I know what the “have a seat…” reference is to, and I can use google very well, thankyouverymuch.
Someone is clueless, and it might not be me…
Didn’t we start this discussion about a particular video? Which I have been unable to see, and therefore unable to comment on? All I’m asking is, WTF are we looking at? Has the video been removed, moved, or am I unable to view it for some other technical reason?
And am I being accused of being a pedophile because I can’t view the OP’s video? WTFx2?
Oh, I agree with you that Rand Rover’s comment was completely weird / out-of-line by the way. When you said you had no idea what it meant I figured you didn’t get what the reference was to. Should have explained that in my post. Sorry.
And yeah, I can’t view it either.
Googling the words cisco unicycle turns up this: http://www.facebook.com/video/video.php?v=655348119965
And also the casting call: http://www.unicyclist.com/forums/showthread.php?p=1347204
ETA: I’m sure Cisco took it down because of the nature of the comments on Youtube.
Is this the video in question? all 15 seconds of it? Don’t blink, you’ll miss the whole thing…
I’ll assume the 15 sec video is what we are discussing. If so, I think the evil may be in the eye of the beholder. First of all, it’s exceedingly brief and unless I deliberately slip into the mind of the pedophile, I can’t make much sense of the ad at all. The acting of the guy at the computer is poor, and even after watching it 4 times, I can’t figure out what the girl is supposed to be dressed as – she’s covered from head to toe with a costume that isn’t the least bit revealing, sexy, or age-determinate, and the “connected” sign really makes no sense unless you are assuming the worst, and I can’t imagine Cisco is that perverted.
Besides, what does a unicyle have to do with a wireless connection? How does that denote “speed”?
I’ve seen clever ads, but this one merely baffles me.