KANSAN COMMENT
The rating game
By CASS SEXON Assistant News Editor
In an effort to avert film classification by legislation, the Motion Picture Association of America developed a rating system for films made by its members. "GMRX," now amended to "GGPRX" because of parental confusion as to whether their children were mature or not, has, if nothing else, made it easier for threater-goers to pick the films they want to see.
The next logical step in the rating game would be for book publishers to rate their product on a scale from "W" for "Winnie-the-Pooh" to "D" for "Dirty," or at least put a table of page numbers in the front so that readers would not find it necessary to skim the whole book to find the juicy passages.
In fairness to the new motion picture ratings system, it has two saving factors—it saves parents the price of an admission ticket to preview a film before sending their children to see it, and it saves those who prefer films with sex and violence from the boredom of sitting through a film with little of either.
Imagine the chagrin of thousands of people who found "The Graduate" too blatant for their tastes to find that the film would have rated only an "M" (or a "GP") , or the indignation of school children forbidden to see "The Satan Bug" when, as it turns out, the film would have been given a "G" rating.
The classification system was set up as a compromise between total freedom and the threat of government classification. As such, it has become a mockery of the situation it was to alleviate.
An "X"-rated film is a box-office draw, especially so when it stars a well-known entertainer. The impression given by many recent films is that a top star is used to get the attention of the theater-goer, and enough sex is thrown in to earn the "X" rating as a drawing card. The success of "Midnight Cowboy" is a prime example of how well the combination works.
On the other end of the rating teeter-totter are the films striving for the "G" rating. The typical shoot-em-up scene in a western, where the man in the black hat always loses, are rapidly becoming a thing of the past. Film producers must be cautious about portraying too much blood or filming scenes in which the hero does a little more than just kiss his leading lady, but the "G" rating is not jeopardized by making the hired killer the hero. Presumably that situation is in keeping with community standards.
The idea of what warrants a restrictive rating is, at best, ambiguous, and at worst, downright mystifying. Films showing any sort of "perverse" sexual activity or a too-generous helping of normal sexual activity are always given a rating of at least "R."
Yet the guidelines for the display of violence are so loose that they are farcical. Perhaps this is related to the idea that modern American society has no conception of "perverse" violence, or that in a war-oriented society, it is almost impossible to conceive of children receiving a more generous helping of violence in a film than they receive daily in the mass media.
Still another drawback to the rating system, though minor in comparison, is the fact that films from other countries, films by non-members of the MPAA and other free-lance films technically rate an automatic "X" rating, meaning that they have not earned the Production Code Authority "Seal of Approval." In order to get a rating, films made by industries outside the MPAA must be submitted to the same panel that rates MPAA films. For many foreign films, this would be a waste of time.
But it would be no more of a waste of time than the entire rating system. The major accomplishment of the MPAA classification attempt, and perhaps its only worthwhile accomplishment, is that it keeps classification out of the hands of the government. As poor as the system is, the alternative of rating by legislation could hardly be an improvement.
Sorel's News Service
WASHINGTON—Tricia Nixon feels that Vice-President Agnew's attacks on the news media had a salutary effect: "I'm a close watcher of newspapers and TV. I think they've taken a second look. You can't underestimate the power of fear. They're afraid if they don't shape up . . ."
Little Miss Nix It
THE UNIVERSITY DAILY KANSAN An All-American college newspaper
Kansan Telephone Numbers
Newsroom--UN-4 3-6464
Business Office--UN-4 4358
Published at the University of Kansas daily during the academic year except holidays and examination periods, in the mester, 10 a year. Second class postage paid at Lawrence, Kan. 66044. 27% fee on goods, services and employment education expenses students without regard to color, creed or national origin. Opinions expressed are not necessarily those of the Kansas or the State Board of Regents.
NEWS STAFF
News Advisor ... James W. Murray
Managing Editor ... Ken Peterson
Campus Editor ... Ted Iliff
News Editors ... Donna Shrader
Editorial Editors ... Naomi Monroe Dodd, Mike Rieke
Sports Editors ... Bruce Carnahan,
Makeup Editors ... Charlie Campbell
George Wilkens
Wire Editor ... Ken Cummins
Women's Page Editors ... Carolyn Bowers
Arts and Reviews Editors ... Genelle
Richards, Rick Geary
Asst. Campus Editors. Vicki Phillipery
Nila Walker
Asst. News Editors . Cass Sexson,
Rachel Reece
Photographers ... Ron Bishop
Bruce Bernstein, Randy Lefflingwell
BUSINESS STAFF
Business Advisor ... Mel Adams
Business Manager ... Jerry Bottenfield
Asst. Business Mgr. ... Mike Banks
Advertising Mgr. ... Larry Cates,
Joanne Bos
National Ad. Mgr. .. Oceane Bassisson
Classified Mgr. .. Shawn Shearer
Promotion Manager .. Jim Huggins
Service Manager .. John Lagios
Mmber Associatied Collegeiate Prss
Mmber Associatied Collegeiate Prss
David Sokoloff 1970
hearing voices—
To the editor:
Several weeks ago, I was assigned by the editors of the Kansan to write a story on reported discrimination within the scholarship hall system. Officially and unofficially I found none within that system. As a matter of fact, the scholarship hall residents seem more than willing to accept residents of minority groups into their living situation. But, in the course of my investigation, I discovered something about myself, as well as about discrimination.
This "thing" which I discovered is perhaps elementary, but it caused my news write-up to be quite slanted, and much too personal by good journalistic standards. Because of this slant, my story was not printed in the Kansan. This points up the flexibility and good judgment practiced by most Kansan staff members. But, these are not what I intend to write about.
Because I am a white, Anglo-Saxon and a sometimes Protestant, many of the aspects of discrimination against minority groups seemed to be merely problems of an official nature, that is, they could be solved simply by passing laws and making new policies which would eradicate official discrimination. After talking with several members of such minority groups, particularly Dr. Robert Sanders of the University Human Relations Board, I realized that discrimination cannot be solved this way. Of course, I knew this, but human nature was evidently something which I had completely discounted in this area. But, this is the type of discrimination which the blacks are fighting. I didn't think I would encounter it on a so-called "liberal" campus, but it's here.
Whites today are becoming increasingly upset because blacks do not want to accept middle-class values and ideas of integration, whether it be busing children to schools or job quotas. Why? Because black collegiates are trying to find their racial identity. And, why not? They haven't had any for 300 years! They certainly can't find it in the predominantly white fraternities, sororities or scholarship halls. As a white, I would not want to live in an all-black living situation. I would feel as outnumbered as they would, having to formulate a completely new set of patterns and securities. And, if I were the only white or a white smaller group member, I too would term my membership in the living group tokenism.
How can the white culture expect to learn about the black culture from one or two individuals of a group simply by living with them?
No, the problem lies elsewhere, in the minds of the prejudiced individual. This is the type of discrimination which blacks are fighting or ignoring. Yet, contact is the only way to help these unenlightened, prejudiced individuals jump the gap to understanding. Fighting this discrimination takes more than laws or policies; it takes self-evaluation and objectivity and outside investigation on a personal level. I don't know how you can make people to do this, but it has to be done somehow. If only everyone would at least work on it, then perhaps, people won't have to worry about the color of their skins to be able to communicate with one another.
To the editor:
Monday, March 16th I attended a lecture by Col. Mohr on the subject of sensitivity training and sex education and I have never in my life been so sickened and disgusted at the behavior of an audience. I wanted to hear what Col. Mohr had to say but was prevented by those that came only to break up the meeting. They broke it up by shouting filthy words, cheering loudly at any mention of pornography, sex, or communism, by throwing marshmallows at the speaker and simply by making so much noise Col. Mohr was not able to talk.
I understand that a whole busload came from another city in order to assist in breaking up the meeting. This was done in an organized manner from all parts of the auditorium. These people evidently feel that their right of free speech somehow takes precedence over and allows invasion of another's right to freedom of speech.
No action was taken. Many of the students were as disgusted as I and one made the comment that maybe if more of the outside community knew what was going on it could be stopped. Why is this invasion of the constitutional right of free speech and this invasion of the right of free and peacable assembly permitted? By permitting this, aren't we in reality guilty of condoning and encouraging it?
Other communities have met this problem. For instance; in Salt Lake City, Utah last January three persons were sentenced to 6 months in jail for breaking up a meeting. Perhaps force is the only thing this type of person understands. If we ignore this situation it can only get worse; it certainly won't just go away.
Many of us that were at this meeting want to know what will be done about this situation in the future?
Mrs. Katherine Tarr Lawrence, Kansas