Evening star., 1920-10-22
FILM BOARD INDEPENDENT
Secretary Resents Inference It Is
Controlled by Producers.

To the Editor Of The Star:
In your columns Of October 4, under
the title. Motion Picture Reform"
you printed a Letter signed by Wilbur !
F. Crafts, the head we believe, Of the
International Reform Bureau.
statement in that letter concerning
the national board of review of mo-
ton pictures, namely, that lit should |
be known that the national board of
review is a successor of the national
board of censorship, both of which
bodies were supported by the motion
picture men themselves, though they
are assumed to have some restraining
influence over the pictures" The in |
ference here is obvious. !
The national board, both in its an
nual reports and statements to the
public, has time and time again made
the matter of its financial report alb
solutely unequivocal. For the benefit
of your readers. we shoS1d be obliged
for the courtesy OF space in your
national board charges a fiat rate per
negative reel (the standard 1000 feet)
for every picture it reviews. This
charge is made irrespective Of what
the board passes it as it stands, or
whether it fails to pass it or makes
eliminations. The matter Of charge
for inspecting films is copied from
the plan effected by the legal state
boards existing in four states. in or
they carry on their work of censor
ship. In the case of the national
board. however, the charge is in the
nature of q fee. with no other means
forcing payment: whereas in the case
of the state boards. the charge
amounts to a tax collected by COM
pulsion of law. and some Of the state
boards charge for every positive reel
of film exhibited in their particular
of a picture intended for distribution.
The national board. moreover, supple
ments the revenue derived from its
review activities by the subscriptions
who supply their official nles with
the boards bulletin service, which
gives various information on all the
pictures submitted to it. This is an
educational work Of much value, as
has been recently testified to by a
committee Of the said city of,cials
who went on record to the effect that
| the lists furnished them by the ma
tional board made for effectiveness
and efficiency in the local regulation
munities. I'VE can And no mention Of
| this phase Of the national boards
| work in your aforementioned corre-
| spondent's letter.
| Representing washington, d. C.. on
! the national boards national advis-
| ory committee OF approximately 100
prominent citizens located in the
principal cepters throughout the
country are Samuel Gompers. Fred
erick C. Howe and J. e. McCulloch.
| AS regards the statement IN the let
ter under scrutiny that the present
writer's relation to the motion pic
iture producers and exhibitors is pre-
cisely that Of q paid attorney" the
following fact may be worthy Of con-
Isideration:
The once STAFF Of the national
board is selected and employed BY the
boards executive COMMITTEES. to which
leach and every member Of the staff 10
solely responsible and which has ab.
solute control Of the disbursement Of
the boards funds and the direction Of
the staffs activities.
Opposition to the national board,
embracing the innuendos concerning
its integrity. has long been raised by
those reformers whose interest has
been that Of vice investigation. They
have opposed the national board be-
cause that organisation is opposed to
legal censorship. Of which the vice
Investigators are among the principal
4 advocates.
Reform is as much a profession Al
is the motion picture Industry. It has
got to keep the reform-pot boiling ia
Iorder to keep fts adherents and sym