The point that one of the individuals quoted in the article makes -- about how it's better not to commit the offense in the first place -- is well taken.
Normally, I would dismiss this as just a publicity stunt, but one fact makes me think that perhaps the move was genuine:
[Simons] refused a request to supply a copy of one of the offensive photographs in the catalogue in a bid to expedite matters.
"You find the images, you could (use) them. I'm not proud of what I did," he said.
If he were just trying to get a little free publicity, he would have provided the press with as many of the images in question as possible. That's the typical cynical publicity route, which you see in the media all the time: magazines supposedly decry the thinness of models or celebrities, but in the process post huge pictures of those celebrities, and therefore actually promote them and their emaciated look.
Simons' refusal to provide the images suggests genuine regret on his part.
It would be nice if this weren't just an isolated event, but an indication of more responsible size-positive advertising practices in the future. Time will tell.