Motion Picture Herald (Mar-Apr 1940)

MOTION PICTURE HERALD MARTIN QU1GLEY, Editor-in-Chief and Publisher Vol. 139, No. I OP April 6, 1940 BY COMMISSION HOW would you like to have this industry operated by a Federal Motion Picture Commission? A sparkling demonstration of what it might be like is currently afforded by the activities of the Federal Communications Commission pertaining to television. As has been so often observed here, the broadcasting institution is the first of the industries to be born and cultured entirely under the domination of government control. That has been going on now these twenty years, through which, most rapidly of late, there has been arising among the bureaucrats a philosophy of government utterly at variance with the concepts under which this America and its business evolved with conspicuous advantages to the whole people. Tuesday night Mr. James Lawrence Fly, chairman of the FCC, took to the air to defend the considerably criticized proceedings of that body in rebuking the enterprise of the Radio Corporation of America in seeking to merchandise television receivers, after having had the commission's approval of a limited presentation of advertising material by television transmission. The commission's approval was, after RCA announced sets for sale, rescinded, and now Mr. Fly promises to rescind the rescinding "soon." The defense of this fast-and-loose performance is that it just might be that the exploitation now, with wide distribution of sets, would tend to freeze the technological progress of the art of television, or in the event of changes in standards might find the consumers in possession of sets that would become useless. In the next breath the chairman observed that "we neither have nor desire any regulatory power over the sale of receivers or over advertising." Mr. Fly of course meant the advertising of receivers for sale. His statement about power over such activities lacked a great deal of fundamental sincerity. It is more than obvious that because of objection to RCA's advertising announcements, about which he could directly do nothing, he and his commission did all that could be done by indirection, the cutting off of revenues to support the development. He says in effect to television that it can advertise and sell sets, but it cannot carry on a business to support the new art, save by the whim of the FCC. SEEKING to defend the position Mr. Fly has insisted that television is unique among the industries in that the receiver and transmitter must fit "as the key fits the lock," whereas he considers that a 1905 automobile and a 1920 radio set will still work. That is merely his fine-spun phraseology of a "sea lawyer." His 1905 motor car would be a menace in any village street, totally incompetent to function in modern traffic. His 1920 radio set would deliver only a fraction of what the present transmitters put on the air. Something in the vicinity of fifteen millions of dollars has been invested in television up to this time. It wants to go to work. FCC says it wants perfection, first. Who is to judge, the business which has to succeed and survive by performance, or a remote bureau with nothing at stake but its politics? THE scientific, industrial, technological attainments of the United States have been had by interaction between manufacturers, purveyors and the customers. Competition has taken care of progress, development and the continuous process of elimination of the obsolete. American society, beyond all others, has existed by doing business, in a free field. This is a nation of commerce. Invasion of that freedom is destructively revolutionary. Additionally, it may be observed that Mr. Fly appears to have been taking a special advantage of his position by taking to the air and its audience. The criticism which he was seeking to meet appeared in the printed pages of the press, quite another audience. Also, incidentally, concerned as the FCC is about radio standards, certain attentions to matters of rhetoric, grammar and diction would seem to be indicated. AAA "ESCAPIST MARKET" FROM time to time, as you may perhaps remember, remarks have been made on this page about the subject of entertainment and what is entertainment, with a certain bearing on the efforts of persons who considered themselves laden with significances and messages of social import. Interesting relevancy, pertaining to the function of the amusement screen, is observable in a review of the foreign films markets of the last year just issued by the Bureau of Foreign and Domestic Commerce in Washington, in the course of which it is said: "In passing, it is interesting and important to note that the war has already brought about a marked change in 'film tastes' in the belligerent countries. Where during normal times the best revenue pictures were those with historical and romantic subjects, there is now a keen desire for pictures such as comedies, mystery stories or any kind of light but engrossing entertainment that is likely to afford escape from wartime anxieties. In some markets of the warring nations, sad and morose scenes are actually barred by censorship boards. "Exhibitors in some markets are taking pains to emphasize in their advertisements the cheerful and enlivening character of their programs. "It goes without saying that our American producers and distributors are preeminently well-equipped to supply films that will satisfy these tastes which are now dominant throughout great regions of the earth." THERE is currently widespread discussion in the daily press of the proper functions of the theatre screen in relation to social issues and problems. Often quoted is the printed observation of Mr. Frank Nugent, in the New York Times, [Continued on following page, bottom of column l]