The Moving picture world (April 1921)

MOVING PICTURE ARTHUR JAMES Editor-in-Chief APRIL 2 9 Reform Is On Trial For the first time in the history of moving pictures the newspapers of the United States are taking the screen and its problems seriously. Several causes may be pointed to as responsible for this result. Among them is the persistent campaign carried on by "Moving Picture World," which is read by more big newspaper editors than any other publication in the industry. This campaign sought to make plain the very certain fact that the screen and the newspaper were close together with a common interest and a similar status in the life of the nation. The pioneer work having been done it needed only such an occasion as the Crafts' incident to induce the important newspapers to take up the cudgels in behalf of the screen and to go even farther than the industry has gone in its own defense. The stupid Brooklyn Eagle, with its sensational campaign for censorship waged with vigor from a platform of misinformation and misrepresentation, with all the hick hypocrisy that is so delightful to its clientele, has been made a show of by the really important New York Times which used to speak lightly and only lightly about moving pictures. j In an editorial that is fundamentally sound and which has the future as well as the present in mind the Times speaks of Dr. Crafts' proposal for an interstate regulation that requires a license agreement subscribing to the thirteen points decided upon by the producers for a clean screen program. It says: "What is begun with the film will go on to the play, the picture and the book. It is Dr. Crafts' habit to protest that he is misrepresented, credited with purposes far more extensive than the fact. But it has been observed that he and his associates vary their program to fit the prospects; and their general rule seems to be to take all they can get. This bill is the beginning of a process which may eventually destroy the arts in America. The moral crusaders are a long way from that goal, but they are on the march." If the Crafts' conference had done nothing but place the New York Times among the champions of the screen it would not have been in vain. But it did much more than that. It put Dr. Crafts on record as subscribing to a fair and square program. He himself called in the newspapers to report all that went on. They did report it and they placed Dr. Crafts in a position where he must play fair with the moving picture industry or stand utterly discredited in the eyes of the nation. We intend to see to it that this fact is not forgotten. We so notify Dr. Crafts. He is not dealing now with the saloon -or with the saloon standards of intelligence. He will be safe so long as he plays fair and keeps the spirit as well as the letter of his agreement. He cannot, as one clergyman has described him to us, be "crafty" or shrewd or smart. He must be one hundred per cent, open and square and treat the industry as it has treated him. All reform movements are now on trial. If Crafts fails in frankness, he as the recognized reform leader of the United States will be condemned and all his associates will have to share in the condemnation. The screen is not helpless, it is not supine, it is not a weakling and, standing on its rights, it is prepared to guarantee to the public and to itself a fully hciest and an entirely square deal.