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)

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.

228 MOTION PICTURE COMMISSION". (The brief submitted by Mr. Cocks is as follows:) Brief Submitted by Mr. Dkrin G. Cocks. Advisory Secretary of the National Board of Censorship of Motion Pictures. New York, N. Y. 1. Constltiitionaliti/. —The national board holds such proposed legislation for censorship is nnconstitutional limitation of the freedom of speech. 2. Politics. —Political appointees on Federal. State, and local hoards of censorship are temporary and are o])en to many sinister influences. 3. Federal censor.sJiii) no .■solution. —Federal authorities will ne\'er be able to dictate to States or cities what pictures they shall or shall not see. Other boards of censorship will inevitably be demanded. 4. Legal decisions. —The law is necessarily too inflexible to apply to all or most of the complex situation presented in motion-picture subjects. 5. Complex ethical questions. —Many of the fllm subjects most dan;;erous to morals belong to the extra-legal group, over which the Federal board would have no legal jurisdiction. 6. Legal censorsliip is essentinllij destructive. —The national board is able. by moral suasion, to do constructive work in censoring Alms, while the legal Federal board would find itself limited to destructive censoring. 7. Censorship for the ichole public. —Any censorship nuist be for the whole public. It is impossible to exclude from picture houses either sex or peoi)le of different ages of intellectual development. 8. Paternalism in morals. —The intelligent public have abundant protection against inunoral or illegal shows. A legal Federal bojird rejjresents class legis- lation or paternalism in morals. !>. Legal censorship oppressive and iinnecessarii. —Legal censorship coiucs just before exhibition throughout the country. The loss of business following the decisions of a few conuuissioners would inevitably develop bitterness and re- course to the courts. The proposed Federal law gi\es no [lOwer of apiie.il from decisions of a few people. 10. The magnitude of the ivork. —The enormous output of lilms demands the attention of many skilled people. Honest criticism results in eye strain and nerve strain. The judi<-ial lemi)eran!ent is shattered when innny i>ictures jjre seen <-ou- (innoiisly. A great and iiu-i-cnsing business should not In- dependent on .-! f,>w persons, however skilled, who are certain to have some el(>ineuts of bias. In i)ractice, the commissioners would be compelled to sit as indi\ idiiais, I'.icli judging a per cent of the motion-picture output for tlu> entire country. li. Censorsliip intenschi human. —Moral jtidgnicnis .irc often dependent on custom. As society changes so must censorslii]t. !l can never be static. It must be reS))onsive to ]tul)lic ojiinion. Since aci-optnble moral standards have* never been formulativl for large masses of people, the national bourd receives and the projiosed Fedeial board must c\|)ect unfavorable criticism from a hundred dit'i'erent elements of .socie|_\- ;in<l from business, professional, exiiib- iting. and manufacturim.' interests. VJ. Ihcisi'iiis (III mural iiii<siii,iis. -\\ is «piest ionable wlietiuM" the (Joxcrn- iiKMit iias the riglU to decide on (piestions that are finidanieiitally moral and are complicated by questions of taste, custom, and oiiinion for the whole cotnitry. It Is also (piestionable wlietiier tlu^ Federal authorities can holil the |)roiliicts of ;in industry guilty and not subject to apiica.l until they are atl- judged b.A' se\-eral individuals lo lie iiniocent. The .Xational I'.o^rd of Censorsliip is in r;i\or of \dlnntary nonollicial. co- opeialhi' t'ensorship of motion pictures in contrast to legal, otlicial. prepub- j'cliy <-e;!Sor.ship by authoi-ili(>s. Federal. Slate, and local. !n the bill intror'uced into the Senate by the Ib-n. lloke Smith of (Jeoi-gi.-i. .ind into t!ie House by I{epres(>ntat i\ f Hughes, it is proi>osed that a commission of live shall be appoiided by the President. They shall serve for six years. ■'The salary of the cliairman sliall be .''■.; l.'iOii ;i year and tli;;t of e-icli oihei- coni- missi(Mier .i;."..U(i(» ;i yeni'." The connnission may appoint deputy coinmissiomu's and other assistants. 'l'li''se lilnis iire prohibited I'of (Mitranc(> into interlate conunerce whicji nt'e "obscene, indecent. iininor;il. or depict a bull-tight, or a prize tight, or ar(> of sncli a <-haracter that their exhibition would tend to cm'rtipl the morals of i-hildren or ,iduUs or incite to crime." This is the oidy