Motion Picture Story Magazine (Feb 1914 - Sep 1916 (assorted issues))

Record Details:

Something wrong or inaccurate about this page? Let us Know!

Thanks for helping us continually improve the quality of the Lantern search engine for all of our users! We have millions of scanned pages, so user reports are incredibly helpful for us to identify places where we can improve and update the metadata.

Please describe the issue below, and click "Submit" to send your comments to our team! If you'd prefer, you can also send us an email to mhdl@commarts.wisc.edu with your comments.




We use Optical Character Recognition (OCR) during our scanning and processing workflow to make the content of each page searchable. You can view the automatically generated text below as well as copy and paste individual pieces of text to quote in your own work.

Text recognition is never 100% accurate. Many parts of the scanned page may not be reflected in the OCR text output, including: images, page layout, certain fonts or handwriting.

THE (1 BEAT 1) EH ATE 73 Follow this course rigidly, let the few criminals know that there is no place in the business for them, and I predict that in a short time no possible ground for complaint will arise from even the most austere. Now, which of the two courses will the people choose? The one in which they delegate the control of their morals and preferences to others, or elect to decide such questions for themselves? The one in which, to detect a small percentage of evil, the entire industry is subjected to a burdensome inquisition, or the one in which the evil is detected and punished without involving anything else? The one in which the film manufacturer must first prove that he is not guilty, or the one in which he is presumed to be innocent until t h e contrary is proved? Or to speak more briefly, the Russo Turkish, mediaeval w a y proposed by Canon Chase, or the American, modern way advocated by me? Which of the two do you choose? And in passing judgment, do not fail to take the following into consideration. A single censorship board would be bad enough, but it is impossible to believe that, if the principle of censorship is adopted, other boards would not spring up all over the country. Censorship already exists in Boston, Chicago, Detroit, and other cities, and is statewide in Ohio. Kansas, and other states. Soon it will probably grow to such proportions as to challenge serious attention, the lines will be drawn, and the struggle for "censorship or no censorship" will be on. And if censorship wins, with its national board, its many State boards and its myriads of municipal boards — what then ? Every cent that censorship costs must be imposed on the exhibitor, and, in turn, forced upon the public, if possible. The pecuniary burden is not Censorship will cut down the strength and virility of films, and make them weak and uninteresting. going to • be assumed by the filmproducer, any more than he will pay out of his pocket the added cost due to increase in raw material or labor. Let the theaters remember that they pay the cost of censorship, leaving it to them to shift the burden to the public, if they can do so-. Furthermore, with a multitudinous censorship there will be constant delays, waiting for boards to meet and pass on films, making corrections suggested by the censors, resubmitting subjects after correction, waiting for court appeals, and from many other causes that are inevitable. And who suffers? The manufacturer? Not at all — he has turned the subject over to the distributor. Who then ? Why, the theater, of course, and, incidentally, the public. They are the ones who suffer from the delays. When a film does not reach the theater on the day promised, what will be the excuse? "Held up and being examined by the Squeedunk Board of Censors." "But," the theater says, "that particular subject was passed by the national censors in Washington and by our own State board." "Very true," says the exchange handling the film, "but the authorities in Squeedunk are getting very careful of late, now that Election Day is coming, and are holding up everything going into the county. Sorry, but as soon as the chairman finishes painting his barn, the film will be censored." But the most important consideration is this : censorship will admittedly cut down the drawing-power — the strength, the virility — of films. Censorship will make them weak and uninteresting. With a hundred censorship boards to pass, will not the filmproducer make his subjects solely for the censors and not for the public ? Will not the question be uppermost in his mind: "Will the censors approve?" With such a mental atti