Uh, Why would condoms ruin a money shot? They do come Off, right?? You need only quickly turn away from the camera (removing them isn’t really visually appealing, I’ll give you that), remove the condom, and come back for the final shot.

Appearances/asthetics are another thing, I’ll grant you, but looks are all about fashion, and fashion changes. Plus, currentcondoms are only somewhat limited in colour/shade, I’ve seen some that are Incredibly obvious, but others that you can hardly see.

If they’ve got the budget to have such lavish sets and wardrobes like the article spends ages talking about, couldn’t they spend a bit of money on removing the condoms in post (but have stills or un-edited footage for regulators?)

Plus, that Money Short article is 3 pages longer than it needs to be. The amount of filler is Shocking. Do they need the extra ad revenue from the extra pages that badly?? (I actually subscribe to Crikey, a news service here in Australia, and it’s money Well spent).