Exhibitors Herald (Dec 1921 - Mar 1922)

MARTIN J. QUIGLEY Publisher &J Editor TISSUE OF * January 7. 1922 "What Is the Holley Movement?"II By MARTIN J. QUIGLEY The question recently asked by this publication as to the precise plan and scope of the Holley movement resulted first in considerable commotion and finally in a statement of significance from Mr. Sydney S. Cohen, president of the Motion Picture Theatre Owners of America. Mr. Cohen said : "The Public Service Department of the Motion Picture Theatre Owners of America never was, is not now and never will be used as an advertising division where financial considerations will be involved." With this statement as a matter of record there is nothing further to be desired in the way of fixing the exact status of the Holley movement insofar as it is identified with the activities of the organization. The movement must now be accorded the respect and dignity to which it is entitled as a non-profit, altruistic endeavor aimed solely to afford a means of materializing the higher aims of the screen for the benefit of the public and the advancement of the industry's prestige. For this precise identification of the Holley movement, now for the first time made sufficiently plain for all to understand, we are grateful. We feel that this pronouncement, dispelling any possible doubt and questioning, will serve to advance this important movement so materially that the pride we shall take in our small part in bringing this about shall prevent us from feeling any resentment over the torrent of angry words that have been addressed to us since our publication of a request for an answer to certain questions that were crying lustily for an answer, without any prompting on our part. * * * So much for our present position on the Holley movement which shall also be our future position, provided it continues on under the same scrupulous custodianship that it now enjoys. . . . We should, at this point, discontinue discussion of the matter had not certain incidents and statements intruded into the forum which we believe are entitled to comment. Among these is a lengthy telegram, filed at Xew York City and signed "Francis Holley." We are loath to credit the authorship of this message to the man who has been described to us as an amiable and venerable philanthropist because it is so cheaply abusive, so volubly rash, and, in addition, it affords nothing even remotely resembling an answer to the questions raised. In event, however, that the almost incredible thing is so, that the Dr. Holley of philanthropy, social service and human benefaction, is the author of this message, then we submit the following comment : This message devotes several hundred words to such questions as asking us if we presume to criticize Dr. Holley because he is endeavoring "to carry the light of knowledge to the shut in miners living in the fastnesses of the Andes" and so carefully avoids every possible consideration of the issue under discussion that in the absence of Mr. Cohen's word we would be very strongly of the belief that irrespective of the facts as known, the writer of the message was striving industriously to kick up a cloud of dust to cover some facts that are not known. The message reaches its irrational height with the question, "Are you a soviet representative, a bolshevist or just a plain mental defective?" In answer to the last part of the question — as the first two appellations are plain drivel — we would say that while we make no broad claims of intellectuality we do declare that our mental processes are sufficiently clear to recognize the motive which causes an attorney who is defending a felon who has been caught red-handed to talk about everything but the testimony and the evidence. Another portion of this message reads as follows: "I am informed that your trade journal is financially supported by certain producer advertisers who have openly avowed their desire to (Concluded on page 33)