Harrison's Reports (1962)

68 HARRISON'S REPORTS May 5, 1962 L « nc a s 1 1 » f • . . . (Continued /rom Front Page) know what will be coming out of the Tv pitcher's box. The oracle of the megacycles is all prepared via re search, newspaper and magazine clips to question you along lines that make for exciting listening to his rating'conscious way of thinking. It's best done through the route of "sensational" questions. The Tv man on the other side of the microphone isn't going to play drum-beater for your film if he can help it much. You're at his mercy right from the start, and the best you could do to assert your position is either play "fall-guy" for the tricked-up questions, or walk out on the interview session, which, bravo for you, you did! But, is this the end of the abuse you Hollywood stars are going to suffer at the hands of most of these program conductors? Was there much of a noticeable improvement in the treatment of guest stars since the unfortunate Ross Hunter incident on the same Tv outlet, same program? Hunter suffered abuse and downright poor professionalism that was shameful. He didn't take the walk of courage you did. But, he did take a beating when a woman interviewer (on the show) threw a mess of egg right in his face because he dared ask her about his "Back Street." Home Ofiiees Must Curb Tv Abuse* We're afraid that the fault lies with the home offices. The ambitious Tv-radio contact in trying to place you all over the dial should insist on these "musts." A careful briefing before air time. You're to know what tricky or touchy questions are to be curved at you. You're to be given the right of objecting to such questions you don't like, you don't think are fair, or you feel are "sensational". To repeat, all this before air time. Your value to the program is to be given every consideration and the mention of your current release is to be made at several judicious intervals. You and the other big names just draw up this nature of reciprocal procedure, insist that the home office contact sees that this be carried out when on the air, and you may get some of the values out of these free appearances that perhaps will show up at the box office. Or else, make outright spot buys on such programs you think will help sell your film, and you'll come out far ahead of the game where the Hollywood star is the bait for the bigger ratings on badly handled interview shows. We of Harrison's Reports with practical experience in these lines of electronic communications, have written so often of these abuses (such as practiced on the Burt Lancasters) that we wonder whether this latest piece will do any more good for the protective good of our Hollywood names, than the pleas preceding this! (Editor's Note : As we were going to press, it was learned that the Tv show on which Burt Lancaster suffered the indignities of poor professionalism, would be going off the air. By the time summer sets in it will no longer be seen. In scurrying around for the basic reasons for the discontinuance of the interview session, no direct answers could be obtained as to whether the Lancaster situation had anything to do with the show going off the air. Neither Westinghouse nor station officials said there was any relationship.) Sex in iitms... (Continued from Preceding Page) investments, know that standing as guardians of the moralities involved in some of this originally objectionable material are their own Production Code Administration, the Legion of Decency and other well-meaning, vigilant groups whose only interest is to see that the decencies of clean, motion picture entertainment are upheld especially for the protection of the young. iteeeptive Advertising Harmful It is not alone the content of these films with alleged immoral implications that are under attack. The manner in which they are advertised is being criticised sharply. This latter method of "sell" operation is something that definitely can be avoided. In many respects, it is fraudulent, deceptive and crudely misrepresentative. Stronger measures should be taken to clean that mess up. Efforts to create advertising copy that doesn't violate the basics of good taste and honest content would at least lessen the double-trouble the industry is headed for. True, desperation can cause many an ad campaign to reach out beyond the boundaries of nice-nellyism, - which is hardly box office for some of the product. But, promising biological impacts and emotional excitements that are not (and cannot) be there in the picture itself, is using an archaic method of asking for more woe than the industry can cope with the fragility of our moral structure in the public eye being what it is, these days. We should be grown-up enough to know that a sex-themed film is dynamite in itself. There's no need to blow it up into an explosion right in our face with the match-sticks of impassioned mis-truths, lovelolhpopping promises, tantalizing "come-on" in much of the advertising copy and art work. a Deatf) in tfje jFanulp This issue will be late, a day or two, in reaching you. It's because there's been a death in the family of your editor. A younger, dearly-beloved brother passed away. Because we come from a family steeped in the religious observance of traditional rituals, we sat out a week of deep mourning at home. It's a sacred interlude of "time out" from the hustle-and-bustle of the work-a-day life. Verily, it's one of the ways in paying respect to a departed soul whose righteous way of life was a religion unto itself almost beyond the piety of prayer. So long, Jack! "Cash on Demand" (Continued from Preceding Page) off to begin paying his time premiums at the local hoosegow for his financial transgressions. He walks into the final fade-out with the calm imperturbability of a bank president on his way to a board of directors meeting. Produced by Michael Carreras; directed by Quentin Lawrence; screenplay by David T. Chantler and Lewis Greifer based on a play by Jacques Gillies. General patronage.