Motion Picture Commission : hearings before the Committee on Education, House of Representatives, Sixty-third Congress, second session, on bills to establish a Federal Motion Picture Commission (1978)

MOTION PICTURE COMMISSION. 213 their iritei'e>t to niaii}' of tlio people in iirbjin centers, and doubtless interfere with much of the present business of the moving-picture houses; wliile the man who stands for a rigid censorship of every- thing shown on the reguhir stage or in the fihns would, of course, strongly reconimend the standards established. Moving-pK ture hlms have become a very imj)ortant article in in- terstate commerce. They are shipped io the States ns food products, as raw mareritds. a?, finished goods are shipi)ed. It is just as impos- sible for them to be used successfully in interstate business, when a growing number of States, and of communities within States^ take steps to prevent, if not their sale or rent, at least their consumption in local ui(iving-|uctui-e liouses. which amounts in effect to the same thing. Objectional>le pictures which are reganled by the States and by local communities within States as injurious to public morals and conduct will to an increasing degree, in the light of a growing pub- lic sentiment, be prohibited in the same way as in the absence of national regulation the States would suppress obscene pictures and prohibit tlie sale of dangerous narcotics or impure foods. The problem is a national one, because it concerns the moral and ultimately the physical and material Avell-being of the whole nation. It transcends all State lines as much as do other questions which the Nation has had to deal w^ith, because the States acting separately could not cope with the situation, such as the regulation of railroads, of navigation, the prevention of the use of United States mails for fraudulent and immoral purposes, and the prohibition of the ship- ment across State lines of impure foods. It seems apparent that the motives lying back of the creation of the New Yoi-k Board of Censorship have not been accomplished. The dissatisfaction with the pictures has grown with the progress of the business, although the objectionable films are less in number and higher in standards than formerly. State and local regulation is on the increase. Personallv I do not believe that there is any es- cape short of national regulation. While the moving-picture com- panies are to-day o])posing this step. I predict that within five years they themselves will be compelled to ask for it in order to avoid the confusion and loss of business resulting from tlie efforts of the States and local communities to deal with the matter individually. If there l>e no regulation the film companies will be compelled to deal with this j^roblem not only with 48 state boards of censorship but probably witli many communities within some of the States. I realize tliat tliere are objectionable features in tiie National Board of Censorship, but I see no refuge from the duplication of Avork in the inspection of jHctures. and the resulting confusion and loss of busi- ness that would l)e caused by forcing the States to handle the matter for themselves. It ought to be said to the credit of the standard film companies, who are submitting their films to censorship, that they do not manu- facture the ris(|ue and positively indecent i)ictures which are being circulated and used in certain quarters throughou.t the country and which constitute according to various estimates about 3 per cent of the total number of films exhibited. These are circulated and will continue to be circulated, unless there be Federal regulation, as it is obvious that tlie States can not deal with this matter successfully.