Exhibitor's Trade Review (May-Aug 1925)

Page 16 Exhibitors Trade Revie mill iiiiiiiiiiii!iiinii!iitHiiiiriiii!iii!iiiiiiiiiuiiiiiiiniiiiii!iiiiiiiiiiiiii What an Exhibitor Thinks o f National Advertising ^^^^^^ | i OME of the remarks that have appeared in this page anent the subject of National Advertising seem to have caused a little annoyance. It is altogether natural that any advertising department which is spending money in large wads for magazine space should be a little touchy about brash criticism from a trade paper source, since it often happens that the big chief in the well upholstered private office is only half sold on the way his money is being spent and such criticism may make him even more restive as he finds money being shoveled out the window without any substantial increase in play-dates to compensate for it. So it isn't surprising that some folks jump to the handiest answer, which is — obviously — that a trade paper which criticizes national advertising of motion pictures is actuated merely by greed, envy, jealousy, etc. That, in the light of motion picture history, sounds like an appropriate answer. Unchallenged, it might get by. But it isn't to the point. What I think about national advertising, for it or against it, is of no consequence in connection with this discussion. It isn't a matter of what anybody thinks. The only thing that is germane is what we know, and that means facts. Now, before going into the generalities of the subject further, let me clear up another mistaken idea that has cropped up several times: Nothing that has been said here with regard to national advertising has been aimed at national advertising as such. No one, as far as I know, has ever issued blanket condemnation of lead pipe, as such. Lead pipe, in fact, is a very useful and necessary article. But it can be used in other ways; for instance, it can be forcefully applied to the posterior cranial area in such manner as to knock hell out of the victim. National advertising is not being condemned per se when we say here that it ought not to be used as lead pipe is sometimes used. There is need of national advertising and a lot of it, in this business. But the need is for national advertising constructively used to build business for the industry. Not for national advertising designed to bring the exhibitor under control, to submerge him, to make him a mere employee of the distributor. Now, to get down to what an exhibitor thinks: I have heard the views of a fair number, but I have received a letter from a firm of exhibitors, located down in Florida, which is fairly representative of many opinions. Here it is, with names deleted because I don't wish to bring down the concentrated wrath of the exchanges on two fellows who have nerve enough to say what they think: "National advertising is the worst competitor the small exhibitor has locally. Instead of voting an enormous amount for national advertising, vote a reduction in ad matter; vote it to furnishing free trailers to the exhibitor on payment of postage both ways, or sell him a trailer, service money to be refunded when the contract is completed provided all trailers have been returned in good condition and if they have not, charge for the ones missing. Trailers are the best medium of advertising the small exhibitor has. We small exhibitors have to pay a big price to take care of the large national advertising cost that does us no good, when if the film were sold at living wage the small exhibitor could do his own advertising to his own advantage. We are for the independent producer and distributor and as fast as we can find pictures we can use you can bet your boots they get the dates. Another thing, however, is that the independent producers and distributors are associated with the ones who are trying to hog the whole business in things called 'Film Boards of Trade.' Why don't the independents get together and have their own organization, which would aid and assist the exhibitor and not double cross him at every opportunity? The members of the trade boards can get away with murder against the small exhibitor if they wish to, yet the poor little exhibitor, if he should try to retaliate will be unfairly dealt with and penalized beyond the limit." That letter tells its own story so much more eloquently than I could possibly that it is a pleasure to quote it even beyond the point where it leaves the subject of National Advertising. And, in a way, what this exhibitor says doesn't get away from the subject of National Advertising, after all. Because National Advertising is merely one of the essential links in a chain that is being forged around the independent exhibitor, depriving him more and more of all freedom of action, of all right to assume that he owns his own business. That is National Advertising as it is being used in this industry today. But the experience of many other lines of business adequately demonstrates that such use doesn't pay out in the long run. So, perhaps, there isn't much to worry about, except this: Exhibitors who are independent and hope to remain in business on an independent basis ought to realize the extent to which National Advertising, misused, can hurt them. Once its dangers are fully appreciated it will lose most of its value as a selling leverage for the distributor and the advertising of motion pictures will take a new and better turn. Next Week : Star Players or Star Executives? ^ilflllllllllllilllllillllllllllllM