Film Exhibitor May Be Prosecuted For Certain Advertising

Wanganui Chronicle, 28 October 1948, Page 6

Film Exhibitor May Be Prosecuted For Certain Advertising

PARLIAMENT BLDGS, Last Night (P^.). —The Minister of Internal Affairs (Mr. Parry), in the House of Representatives today, in a written answer to a question asked by Dr. A. M. Finlay (Govt., North Shore), said that, as approved by the censor, the advertising for a film recently shown in Wellington did not contain the objectionable features mentioned by Dr. Finlay. The question of instituting proceedings against the exhibitor concerned for a breach of the regulations would he taken up. The film was passed by the censor subject to a number of eliminations, with a special certificate denoting that it definitely was unsuitable for children. In these circumstances it was not necessary to discuss this particular film in relation to “Brighton Rock” (which the censor recently banned). Dr. Finlay, discussing Mr. Parry’s answer, said he favoured liberalising censorship as far as possible, but it would obviously be wrong if advertising matter were allowed to do something which a film was not supposed to do—appeal to the baser instincts and encourage to see a dubious film those who were most likely to be adversely affected by it. Such advertisements defied the whole objective of censorship, which was designed to prevent anything deleterious to the community as a whole. The question of a more prudent and helpful system of censorship was one which members of the House should consider.

Mr. Ormond Wilson (Govt., Palmerston North), said he had received a letter from each of two big combines, which said that the film was exhibited by an independent, and its advertising was not in line with the combines. It was public knowledge that the independents were struggling under attacks from powerful combines. The newspaper advertisement about the film was subsequently withdrawn and he hoped no further action would be necessary.