Evening journal., 1922-06-17

9 trations as may be possible and en-
4 deavor to get producers to observ
= them as faithfully as possible in Sc
lecting scenarios and staging pic
= lures.
4 Our thinking on the Standard
I that should be applied in making
|, motion pictures is somewhat cloudet
: by the feeling that the interests oi
children and young men and young
women who make up a consider
s able part of most motion picture
audiences should in some way be
safeguarded In spite Of efforts OF
local organizations to furnish spe-
cial programs for children. many
will continue to attend the regular
motion picture show; even II small
children are barred by the strict en-
forcement of regulations governing
the attendance Of those under a
specified age, the adolescent boys
and. girls will attend
What about them? Should all
pictures be brought to the level of
their needs7 Even II we should
agree that this should be so, there
would be great difficulty in reaching
an agreement on standards to be fol-
lowed Possibly a fair application OF
the standards of the National Board
OF Reviews would approximate what
is desirable.
II is surprising how we differ in
our judgment OF what is proper or
improper for the boys and girls to
see. hear and read. A father with
the best of Ideals and personal
standards took his fifteen -year-old |
daughter to see Damaged Goods"
He contended that the picture in its
horrible details drove home a lesson |
that boys and girls might better get |
from the motion picture screen than |
from personal experience.
Here we touch upon one of the
vigorously debated points in the
function OF motion pictures. Shall
the motion picture show be limited
to furnishing entertainment only,
and is that what people pay their
money to get; or may they properly
attempt to educate their audiences
and exert an influence in the promo
ton of standards OF morality? The
motion picture industry contends
that IL should be no more restricted
in this than the stage, which claims
as one OF It's proper functions the
dramatic presentation OF the great
truths OF life and personal conduct.
II ls not difficult TO understand |
why official censorship-local. State
or personal-has been favored by
many people as the best solution OF
-. t.
seems so direct and final. and II is
assumed that II will relieve the pub
lie OF all further responsibility in the
matter.
During the legislative season OF
1921, motion picture censorship bills
were introduced in thirty-two States.
State censorship was already in op- I
GRAFTON in four other States-Ohio,
Pennsylvania Maryland and Kan 9
sas. The discussion OF the bills at ,
tracted nationwide interest, and
feeling 'or and against these meas
ures ran high.
As might be expected, the motion ,
picture interests. especially the pro- 4
ducers and distributors, lined up
against this proposed legislation. =
I
pected to favor Il as II would tend s
to relieve them of responsibility 10
the public for all pictures shown,
but they saw at once the heavy toll
of expense exRcted by state censor
ship boards would automatically :
be passed along TO them and that Y
they would need TO get this money
from their patrons. thus increasing =
the admission prices already infiat- r
ed by the war tax charges. =
Many of the citizen agencies that =
had been working for better motion Il
pictures were unwilling TO endorse
the principle OF official censorship A
and threw their influence against 3,
he censorship bills. Others quite =
rs vigorously supported them. The A
'esult was a rather worthwhile ed
lcational campaign on the whole
subject of public amusements. A
From a fairly general favoring OF .
he censorship bills at the outset. u
he pendulum OF public opinion =
,ressed and the undesirable aspects ',
II censorship became apparent. IN
The final action In the thirty-two -
tate legislatures was the defeat of A
censorship in twenty states, the A
of censorship boards in r
wo states-New York and Massa a- =
husetts (The Massachusetts law A
ubject to referendum in the fall h,
Z 1929 and the passage OF make
hift measure in one state-Florida- -
y which II was provided that only q
uch pictures might be shown in the DC
tate as had been passed by the st
Iatlonal Board OF Review of Motion A.
'ictures and the New York State
lotion Picture Commission. Sew W
raj states passed substitute meas H
res making It misdemeanor to Al
xhibit motion pictures that are OBJ
Gene, indecent or detrimental to We
ne morals Of the community One ~
{ the most practical of these is that All
assed by the North Carolina leg
lature after an extended discussion Sh
the whole subject II provides AZ.
lat persons responsible for showing -
oscene or immoral motion pictures Al
lall be guilty of misdemeanor J..
nd punishable in the discretion OF an
lie court Many states have similar Ke
ws which. II properly enforced Ia
ould no doubt go far toward deal
g with the situation at which
ate censorship measures are aimed.
NLY DALLAS KIDS