When I first checked the homepage, I thought: Blimey, squiggley is actually Goldie Hawn!!!
Hehe, no, I didn't, but her picture was a little way under yours and was a fun thought for a moment. 
To my mind, I think the organisers of the fair aren't really the 'bad' guys, per se. I mean, as the organisers, they just want to sell as many booths as possible/negotiate the cheapest venue/advertising costs - they're making money. Even organising a baby fair alone regardless of their other interests doesn't automatically make them some kind of virtuous company unless they ONLY sell their spots/booths to natural/organic/breastfeeding/reusuable nappy/little bit wooo companies, y'know? A lot of coporate baby big business is pretty ugly - as you say looking to sell us crap we really don't need by laying on The Guilt or holding back on recalls or using ingredients that aren't 'the best' for our little ones but are cheaper and, hey, we won't notice anyway if their advertising is worded just so, and The Want is created.
In that sense, as a fair organising company then isn't the baby business just the lesser of two evils? The corporate baby stuff isn't funding the arms stuff and vice versa. I find it hard to be offended that the fair organisers deal with both because ultimately they don't give a fig about my baby or my life with them whether they deal with the arms trade or not...
Gawd, I sound cynical.
I would like that the arms fairs didn't exist at all, obviously, but they do, and are perfectly legal, and as I say the perps of what is wrong with them aren't the orgnaisers of the fairs but the attendees.
I suppose it's that I find the bloody baby fairs abhorrent in and of themselves that the 'added bonus' of the organisers having an (even less savory) different branch doesn't either a) surprise me or b) seem unusual.
Am I even making sense? I haven't even finished my first coffee and could be waffling a load of crap here!