Motion Picture Herald (Apr-Jun 1931)

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.

June 2 7, 1931 MOTION PICTURE HERALD 11 RADIO COMMISSION CLEARS RCA OF COMMUNICATIONS MONOPOLY Zukor Spikes Talk Of Big Changes in Paramount Setup Wild and irresponsible rumors concerning important changes in the front rank executive personnel of Paramount Publix were set at rest on Thursday, when, following mention of realignment of executive power of Jesse L. Lasky and Sidney R. Kent, President Adolph Zukor contirmed the retirement of Walter Wanger and definitely scouted stories which credited Kent with becoming production chief over all Paramount units. ■■J definitely want to state," said Zukor, "that Jesse L. Lasky is no\v, just as he has been, head of the Paramount Publix production department. Lasky is in control and no one supersedes him in any way in dealing with Paramount picture production ; nor has there ever been any intention to have any such change in the set up. The retirement of Walter Wanger from the production department activities with which he was connected is merely a step made necessary by the physical necessity of the production job to be done. Aside from that there is no change whatever in the production personnel ; B. P. Schulberg is in charge under Lasky of the actual production and will operate as heretofore in our West Coast studio. His fine work has always been fully appreciated by the executives of this company. He will continue to be, as he always has been, responsible to Lasky. The Eastern studio will continue to be under the management of James Cowan, also directly responsible to Lasky. "Lasky has been vice-president in charge of production for Paramount for 20 years. The record of Paramount pictures during that 20 years has been a record based on the achievement of Lasky. The plans for the new production year under the supervision of Lasky are going forward to what we confidently believe will be a greater success than has ever been achieved by Paramount." Cancellation of Wanger's contract with Paramount, which has been the cause of lengthy negotiations in recent weeks, came about through a cash settlement aggregating between $400,000 and $500,000. The split is understood to have climaxed long standing rivalry between East and West Coast production units, headed by Wanger and Schulberg, respectively, with Wanger getting top post only to be placed under Schulberg a few months ago. MPTOA To Assist in Handling Of Copyriqht Bill Revision MPTOA leaders will attend the re-writing of the Copyright bill before it comes up before the Congress convening next December, with a view to preventing duplication of copyright levies and overcharges. Pictures to Blame Of Course! Vast furore about the motion picture In general and the "gangster pictures" in particular is being raised this week because a 12-year-old boy, Winslow Elliott, was fatally shot in play by Harold Gamble of the same age at Montclair, N. J., after the youngsters had seen a "gangster picture at a theatre." It seems the boys had a "den" and played various lively make-believe games of adventure. They are said to have been rehearsing the action of a picture and the shooting was in imitation of a policeman's efforts as portrayed on the screen. The New York newspapers have raised a hue and cry to blame the motion picture, as usual. It may be pointed out that the boy was killed with a gun, a mail order automatic pistol, not by a motion picture. The published reports indicate that both the police of Montclair and the boy's father knew he had the gun "to use at target practise." It appears too that a mail order house sold the gun to the boy, despite the law against such sales. The daily press has thus far been able to see only the motion picture as a subject of discussion In the matter. There are those, however, who would deem it peculiar for parents to permit the possession of deadly weapons by boys of 12 years, or for police to find them in such possession without confiscation. Apparently there Is to be a country-wide barrage laid down on the text of this accident. Thursday afternoon Motion Picture Herald received a publicity release from Mrs. Clara Savage Littledale, editor of the Parent's Magazine, saying that she and George J. Hecht, publisher, had been moved "to issue an appeal to parents throughout the country to boycott gangster films." By extensive reference to the Code of Ethics and Will H. Hays, the Littledaie-Hecht statement tends to make the episode an instrument of personal and institutional attack. Really Mr. Hays did no shooting. We reiterate that the boy was shot with a gun, which his father and the police alike knew he had. THE EDITOR Independents Lose Plea To Bar Licenses Decision Is "Insult to Intelligence of Congress," Declares Schuette of Protective Association RCA and its subsidiaries have not been found guilty of unlawful monopolizing of radio communication, the Federal Radio Commission at Washington decided Wednesday in a three-to-two decision that involved more than L400 licenses and property estimated to exceed six billions of dollars. "An insult to the intelligence of Congress" was the comment of Oswald F. Schuette, executive secretary of the Radio Protective Association and spokesman for the independents who had carried the case against RCA to the Federal Radio Commission. Schuette said that Congress could be expected to thresh out the matter. See Issue for Congress In Washington circles it was stated that the radio situation in general would be an issue at the next session of Congress, particularly in view of the fact of the close vote of the Radio Commission. Had one more member of the commission cast his ballot on the other side, it was pointed out, the most important trust case in recent years would have been before the courts. The decision of the Radio Commission was upon the question of whether a ruling in a federal district court in Delaware had held RCA to be a monopoly in the meaning of the radio act, which provided that no licenses should be given to corporations found guilty in a federal court of illegal monopolizing of radio communications. The Commission, in line with its ruling, turned down a petition by independent radio interests against renewing licenses to RCA, and 39 licenses were continued immediately. Draw Distinction The Commission majority held that while the Delaware court apparently felt that the RCA interests violated the anti-trust laws in creating a monopoly in radio vacuum tubes, this did not constitute conviction of monopoly of radio communications. The majority drew a distinction in arguing that the radio act aimed only to prevent monopoly of communications, existence of which, they contended, was not implied by the Delaware court's ruling, and Commissioner W. D. L. Starbuck, one of the majority group, said no claim had been made that a monopoly of receiver tubes was of "such magnitude as to stifle communication." C. McK. Saltzman, chairman of the commission, and Commissioner E. O. Sykes, in minority opinions held that receivers are a fundamental part of radio broadcasting communication and that the intent of Congress in the radio act was to penalize companies "using unfair methods of competition." Sykes in particular appealed for a more liberal interpretation of the law.