Reel Life (Sep 1913 - Mar 1914)

38 Winifred Greenwood Favors Local Film Censors. Local censorship of the "movies," by means of a committee of film exhibitors appointed by the mayor and backed by his authority was advocated by John Collier, secretary of the national board of censorship, New York city, before the City Club. "The national board advocates this form of censorship because it does not involve legislation, but is based upon the power already vested in the executive of a city," said Mt. Collier. "If it does not prove satisfactory it can be changed over night, whereas a statute once on the books is rigid and hard to get rid of. " 'Censorship by administrative order,' as this is called, has been adopted by Boston, Portland, Ore., San Francisco and Washington, D. C. In all of these cities it has been satisfactory and I believe it is the type of censorship which can be used to the best advantage. It involves the appointment of a committee which will see all the films brought to the city before they are sent to the theatres. It will have the power to censor any part or all of a film passed upon favorably by the national board, but it will not be able to pass a film which has been declared unfit for exhibition by that body. The committee makes its report to the mayor, who usually sustains its action but who is not bound in any way to do so. He is the court of last resort and when a controversy is on regarding a film, he gives the final word. "By having both the public and the film exhibitor represented on the censorship committee, there is a. good chance for greatly improving the standard of moving pictures, for the latter are usually severe critics. I understand that Milwaukee is dissatisfied with the quality of some of the films shown here and I have no doubt that there is much reason for that feeling. When the city undertakes censorship, it sets itself to a big task, but that is no reason why censorship should not be used. "The national board of censors passes on the average of 120 films each week, which are produced by forty manufacturers. Different committees are in session two or three times a day, giving two hours or more to each session. In the year ending June 1, 1913, approximately $450,000 worth of films was rejected by the censors. I would not say that the producers made this film in bad faith. It was simply a question of a difference in standards. "The highest order of intelligence and the widest possible experience combined with mature judgment are required of anybody who is to conduct censorship. No absolute rules for censorship can be laid down and it is this that makes the task so difficiult. Moving pictures now deal with modern political, social and religious problems. They are the means by which these problems may be brought before the people and thrashed out. Hence, we can readily see that complex and delicate questions of morality arise which puzzle the wisest mind. I would be the last person to claim that the national board exercises the best judgment in many cases. Indeed, if we are in the right in 51 per cent of our decisions, I am satisfied. This gives you an idea of the difficulties which censorship involves, but as I have said before, this is no argument against." Questions put to Mr. Collier at the close of his address brought out the fact that there are a number of "tramp" films being exhibited which have never been brought before the national board. These are produced by manufacturers who are not listed with the national board and who sell their films directly to exhibitors. The Harry K. Thaw film, which was shown in Milwaukee recently, was mentioned by Mr. Collier as being one of this brand. Mr. Collier also stated that the stamp of approval which is placed upon films by the national board may be and often is placed upon films which have been censored unfavorably. This is done by exhibitors who do not wish to lose money by destroying their product or making it over. He explained that a stamp protected by a copyright is now being devised by the national board and that the use of this in connection with the uncensored or adversely censored films will result in suit against the offender. "A local board of censorship should co-operate with the national board," said Mr. Collier, to the extent of keeping in touch with the latter's work through its printed bulletin, which gives the name of each film censored and what changes have been made or ordered made. This would obviate the necessity of seeing every film brought to the city, for some are of an educational nature and are obviously all right." — Milwaukee Journal. Reliance Irene Hunt and George Siegmann in "Giovanni's Gratitude"