From: vbcsc03l@vax.csun.edu (snopes)
Date: 25 May 93 06:45:00 GMT
Newsgroups: alt.folklore.urban,rec.arts.movies
Subject: Re: The MPAA  (long)

The following is the information I received from the Executive Directory of
the National Association of Theater Owners concerning the MPAA's rating system.
It's a pamphlet written by Jack Valenti, President and CEO of the MPAA.  It's
got more than a bit of propaganda, but it does explain some of the background
of the ratings system from the point of view of the man who implemented it:

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

                       THE VOLUNTARY MOVIE RATING SYSTEM

 HOW IT ALL BEGAN

    When I became president of the Motion Picture Association of America (MPAA) 
 in May 1966, the slippage of Hollywood studio authority over the content of 
 films collided with an avalanching revision of American mores and customs.
    By the summer of 1966, the national scene was marked by insurrections on 
 the campus, riots in the streets, rise in women's liberation, protest of the 
 young, doubts about the institution of marriage, abandonment of old guiding 
 slogans, and the crumbling of social traditions.  It would have been foolish 
 to believe that movies, that most creative of art forms, could have remained 
 unaffected by society.

 A New Kind of American Movie

    The result of all this was the emergence of a "new kind" of American 
 movie -- frank and open, and made by filmmakers subject to very few 
 self-imposed restraints.
    Almost within weeks in my new duties I was confronted with controversy, 
 neither amiable nor fixable.  The first issue was the film "Who's Afraid of 
 Virginia Woolf," in which, for the first time on the screen, the word "screw" 
 and the phrase "hump the hostess" were heard.  In company with the MPAA's 
 general counsel, Louis Nizer, I met with Jack Warner, the legendary chieftain 
 of Warner Bros., and his top aide, Ben Kalmenson.  We talked for three hours, 
 and the result was deletion of "screw" and retention of "hump the hostess," 
 but I was uneasy over the meeting.
    It seemed wrong that grown men should be sitting around discussing such 
 matters.  Moreover, I was uncomfortable with the thought that this was just 
 the beginning of an unsettling new era in film, in which we would lurch from 
 crisis to crisis, without any suitable solution in sight.
    The second issue surfaced only a few months later.  This time it was 
 Metro-Goldwyn-Mayer, and the Michelangelo Antonioni film "The Blow-Up."  
 I met with MGM's chief executive officer because this movie also represented
 a first -- the first time a major distributor was marketing a film with nudity 
 in it.  The Production Code Administration in California had denied the seal.  
 I backed the decision, whereupon MGM distributed the film through a subsidiary 
 company, thereby flouting the voluntary agreement of MPAA member companies 
 that none would distribute a film without a Code seal.
    Finally, in April 1968, the U.S. Supreme Court upheld the constitutional 
 power of states and cities to prevent the exposure of children to books and 
 films which could not be denied to adults.
    It was plain that the old system of self-regulation, begun with the 
 formation of the MPAA in 1922, had broken down.  What few threads there were 
 holding together the structure created by Will Hays, one of my two 
 predecessors, had now snapped.  From the very first day of my own succession 
 to the MPAA President's office, I had sniffed the Production Code constructed 
 by the Hays Office.  There was about this stern, forbidding catalogue of "Dos 
 and Don'ts" the odious smell of censorship.  I determined to junk it at the 
 first opportune moment.
    I knew that the mix of new social currents, the irresistible force of 
 creators determined to make "their" films (full of wild candor, groused some 
 social critics), and the possible intrusion of government into the movie arena 
 demanded my immediate action.
    Within weeks, discussions of my plan for a movie rating system began with 
 the president of the National Association of Theatre Owners (NATO), and with 
 the governing committee of the International Film Importers & Distributors of 
 America (IFIDA), an assembly of independent producers and distributors.
    Over the next five months, I held more than 100 hours of meetings with 
 these two organizations, as well as with guilds of actors, writers, directors 
 and producers, with craft unions, with critics, with religious organizations, 
 and with the heads of MPAA member companies.

 THE BIRTH OF THE RATINGS

    By early fall, I was ready.  My colleagues in the National Association of 
 Theater Owners joined with me in affirming our objective of creating a new 
 and, at the time, revolutionary approach to how we would fulfill our 
 obligation to the parents of America.
    My first move was to abolish the old and decaying Hays Production Code.  I 
 did that immediately.  Then on November 1, 1968, we announced the birth of the 
 new voluntary film rating system of the motion picture industry, with three 
 organizations, NATO, MPAA, and IFIDA, as its monitoring and guiding groups.
    The initial design called for four rating categories:

  + G for General Audiences, all ages admitted;
  + M for mature audiences -- parental guidance suggested, but all ages
    admitted;
  + R for Restricted, children under 16 would not be admitted without an
    accompanying parent or adult guardian.
  + X for no one under 17 admitted.

    The rating system trademarked all the category symbols, except the X.  
 Under the plan, anyone not submitting his or her film for rating could 
 self-apply the X or any other symbol or description, except those trademarked 
 by the rating program.  (The X rating's name has been changed to NC-17, a 
 trademarked symbol -- No Children Under 17 Admitted.  This is explained more 
 fully later in this booklet.)
    Our original plan had been to use only three rating categories, ending with 
 R.  It was my view that parents ought to have the right to accompany their 
 children to any movie the parents chose, without the movie industry or the 
 government or self-appointed groups interfering with their rights.  But the 
 theater owners organization (National Association of Theater Owners) urged the 
 creation of an adults-only category, fearful of possible legal redress under 
 state or local law.  I acquiesced in NATO's reasoning and the four category 
 system, including the X rating, was installed.
    So, the emergence of the voluntary rating system filled the vacuum provided 
 by my dismantling of the Hays Production Code.  The movie industry would no 
 longer "approve or disapprove" the content of a film, but we would now see our 
 primary task as giving advance cautionary warnings to parents so that parents 
 could make the decision about the movie-going of their young children.  That 
 decision is solely the responsibility of parents.

 CHANGES IN THE RATING SYSTEM

    We found early on that the M category (M meaning "Mature") was regarded by 
 most parents as a sterner rating than the R category.  To remedy this 
 misconception, we changed the name from M to GP (meaning General audiences, 
 Parental guidance suggested).  A year later we revised the name to its current 
 label, "PG: Parental Guidance Suggested."
    On July 1, 1984, we made another adjustment.  We split the PG category into 
 two groupings, PG and PG-13.  PG-13 meant a higher level of intensity than was 
 to be found in a film rated PG.  Over the past years, parents have approved of 
 this amplifying revision in the rating system.
    On September 27, 1990, we announced two more revisions.  
    First, we introduced five-to-eight word explanations of why a particular 
 film received its R rating.  Since, in the opinion of the Ratings Board, R 
 rated films contain adult material, we believed it would be useful to parents 
 to know a little more about that film's content before they allowed their 
 children to accompany them.  These explanations would be available to parents 
 by calling the local theater playing that picture, or inquiring at the box 
 office.
    Second, we changed the name of the X category to NC-17: NO CHILDREN UNDER 
 17 ADMITTED.  The X rating over the years appeared to have taken on a surly 
 meaning in the minds of many people, a meaning that was never intended when we 
 created the system.  Therefore, we chose to go back to the original intent of 
 the design we installed on November 1, 1968, in which this "adults only" 
 category explicitly describes a movie that most parents would want to have 
 barred to viewing by their children.  That was and is our goal, nothing less.
    We have now trademarked "NC-17: NO CHILDREN UNDER 17 ADMITTED" so that this 
 rating symbol and the legend can be used only by those who submit their films 
 for rating.  Other rating symbols are already federally registered trademarks. 
 Those who do not choose to participate in the rating system can take their 
 film to market using any letters or descriptions they desire, except the 
 trademarked symbols and legends of the rating system.

 THE PURPOSE OF THE RATING SYSTEM

    The basic purpose of the rating system is a simple one: to offer to parents 
 some advance information about movies so that parents can decide what movies 
 they want their children to see or not to see.  The entire rostrum of the 
 rating program rests on the assumption of responsibility by parents.  If 
 parents don't care, or if they are languid in guiding their children's movie 
 going, the rating system becomes useless.  Indeed, if you are 17 or over, of 
 if you have no children, the rating system has no meaning for you.  Ratings 
 are meant for parents, no one else.
    The rating board does not rate movies on their quality of lack of quality.  
 That is a role left to film critics and audiences.  Had we attempted to insert 
 ourselves into judging whether a film is "good, or bad or indifferent" we 
 would have collapsed the system before it began.
    The criteria that go into the mix which becomes a rating board judgment are 
 theme, violence, language, nudity, sensuality, drug abuse, and other elements. 
 Part of the rating flows from how each of these elements is treated on-screen 
 by the filmmaker.  In making their evaluation, the ratings board does not look 
 at snippets of film in isolation but considers the film in its entirety.  The 
 rating board can make its decisions only by what they see on the screen, not 
 what is imagined or thought.
    There is no special emphasis on any one of these elements.  All are 
 considered.  All are examined before a rating is applied.  Contrary to popular 
 notion, violence is not treated more leniently than any of the other material. 
 Indeed many films rated X in the past, and NC-17 now, have at least 
 tentatively been given the "adults only" rating because of depictions of 
 violence.  However, most of the directors/producers/distributors involved have 
 chosen, by their decision, to edit heavier violent scenes in order to receive 
 an R rating.

 HOW THE RATINGS ARE DECIDED

    The ratings are decided by a Rating Board located in Los Angeles.  They 
 work for the Classification and Rating Administration, whose funding comes 
 from fees charged producers/distributors for the rating of their films.  The 
 MPAA President chooses the Chairman of the rating Board, thereby insulating 
 the Board from industry or other group pressure.  No one in the movie industry 
 has the authority or the power to push the Board in any direction.  One of the 
 highest accolades to be conferred on the rating system is that from its birth 
 in 1968 to this hour, there has never been even the slightest jot of evidence 
 that the rating system has ever deliberately fudged a decision or bowed to 
 pressure.  The Rating Board has always conducted itself at the highest level 
 of integrity.  That is a large, honorable, and valuable asset.
    There are no special qualifications for Board membership, except the 
 members must have a shared parenthood experience, must be possessed of an 
 intelligent maturity, and most of all, have the capacity to put themselves in 
 the role of most American parents so they can view a film and apply a rating 
 that most parents would find suitable and helpful in aiding their decisions 
 about their children's movie going.
    As the MPAA President, I take no part in rating decisions, and do not 
 overrule or dissuade the Board from any decisions it makes.  
    No one is forced to submit a film to the Board for rating, but the vast 
 majority of producers/distributors do in fact submit their films for ratings.  
 Any producer/distributor who wants no part of any rating system is free to go 
 to the market without any rating at all or with any description or symbol they 
 choose as long as it is not confusingly similar to the G, PG, PG-13, R, and 
 NC-17 rating symbols.  G, PG, PG-13, R, and NC-17 are federally-registered 
 certification marks of the MPAA.  These rating symbols may not be 
 self-applied.

 The Board Votes on Ratings

    The Board views each film.  Each member present estimates what most parents 
 would consider to be that film's appropriate rating.  After group discussion, 
 the Board votes on the rating.  Each member completes a rating form spelling 
 out his or her reason for the rating.
    Each rating is decided by a majority vote.
    The producer/distributor of a film has the right under the rules to inquire 
 as to the "why" of the rating applied.  The producer/distributor also has the 
 right, based on the reasons for the rating, to edit the film -- if that is the 
 choice of the producer/distributor -- and come back to the Board to try for a 
 less severe rating.  The re-edited film is brought back to the Board and the 
 process goes forward again.

 Appeal of Ratings

    A producer who for any reason is displeased with a rating can appeal the 
 decision to the Rating Appeals Board, which sits as the final arbiter of 
 ratings.
    The Appeals Board comprises 21 members, men and women from the industry 
 organizations that govern the rating system.
    They gather to view the film and hear the appeal.  After the screening, the 
 producer whose film is being appealed explains why he or she believes the 
 rating was wrongly decided.  The chairman of the Rating Board states the 
 reason for the film's rating.  Both the producer and the Rating Board 
 representative have an opportunity for rebuttal.  In addition, the producer 
 may submit a written presentation to the Board prior to the oral hearing.
    After Appeals Board members question the two opposing representatives, they 
 are excused from the room.  The Board discusses the appeal and then takes a 
 secret ballot.  It requires a two-thirds vote of those present to overturn a 
 Rating Board decision.
    By this method of appeal, controversial decisions of the Rating Board can 
 be examined and any rating deemed a mistake set right.
    The decision of the Appeals Board is final and cannot be appealed, although 
 the Appeals Board has the authority to grant a rehearing on the request of the 
 producer.

 WHAT THE RATINGS MEAN

    G: "General Audiences -- All ages admitted."

    This is a film which contains nothing in theme, language, nudity and sex, 
 violence, etc. which would, in the view of the Rating Board, be offensive to 
 parents whose younger children view the film.  The G rating is *not* a 
 "certificate of approval," nor does it signify a children's film.
    Some snippets of language may go beyond polite conversation, but they are 
 common everyday expressions.  No stronger words are present in G-rated films. 
 The violence is at a minimum.  Nudity and sex scenes are not present; nor is 
 there any drug use content.

    PG: "Parental Guidance Suggested; some material may not be suitable for 
         children."

    This is a film which clearly needs to be examined or inquired about by 
 parents before they let their children attend.  The label PG plainly states 
 that parents may consider some material unsuitable for their children, but the 
 parent must make the decision.
    Parents are warned against sending their children, unseen without inquiry, 
 to PG-rated movies.
    There may be some profanity in these films.  There may be violence, but it 
 is not deemed so strong that everyone under 17 need be restricted unless 
 accompanied by a parent.  Nor is there cumulative horror or violence that may 
 take a film all the way into the R category.  There is no drug use content.
    There is no explicit sex in a PG-rated film, although there may be some 
 indication of sensuality.  Brief nudity may appear in an unrestricted film, 
 but anything beyond that puts the film into R.
    The PG rating, suggesting parental guidance, is thus an alert for special 
 examination of a film by parents before deciding on its viewing by their 
 children.
    Obviously the line is difficult to draw.  In our pluralistic society it is 
 not easy to make subjective judgments without incurring some disagreement.  So 
 long as parents know they must exercise parental responsibility, the rating 
 serves as a meaningful guide and as a warning.

    PG-13: "Parents strongly cautioned.  Some material may be inappropriate
            for children under 13."

    PG-13 is thus a sterner warning to parents to determine for themselves the 
 attendance in particular of their younger children, as they might consider 
 some material not suited for them.  Parents, by the rating, are alerted to be 
 very careful about the attendance of their under-teenage children.
    A PG-13 film is one which, in the view of the Rating Board, leaps beyond 
 the boundaries of the PG rating, but does not quite fit within the restricted 
 R category.  Any drug use content will initially require at least a PG-13 
 rating.  In effect, the PG-13 cautions parents with more stringency than usual 
 to give special attention to this film before they allow their 12-year olds 
 and younger to attend.
    If nudity is sexually oriented, the film will generally not be found in the 
 PG-13 category.  If violence is rough or persistent, the film goes into the R 
 (restricted) rating.  A film's single use of one of the harsher sexually-
 derived words, though only as an expletive, shall require the Rating Board to 
 issue that film at least a PG-13 rating.  More than one such expletive must 
 lead the Rating Board to issue a film an R rating, as must even one of these 
 words used in a sexual context.  These films can be rated less severely, 
 however, if by a special vote, the Rating Board feels that a lesser rating 
 would more responsibly reflect the opinion of American parents.
    PG-13 places larger responsibilities on parents for their children's 
 movie-going.  The voluntary rating system is not a surrogate parent, nor 
 should it be.  It cannot, and should not, insert itself in family decisions 
 that only parents can, and should, make.  Its purpose is to give prescreening 
 advance informational warnings, so that parents can form their own judgments.  
 PG-13 is designed to make these parental decisions easier for those films 
 between PG and R.

    R: "Restricted, under 17 requires accompanying parent or adult guardian."

    In the opinion of the Rating Board, this film definitely contains adult 
 material.  Parents are strongly urged to find out more about this film before 
 they allow their children to accompany them.
    An R-rated film has adult content that may include hard language, or tough 
 violence, or nudity within sensual scenes, or drug abuse or other elements, or 
 a combination of some of the above.  That is why parents are counseled, in 
 advance, to take this advisory rating very seriously.

    NC-17: "No children under 17 admitted."

    This rating declares that the Ratings Board believes that this is patently 
 an adult film.  No children will be admitted.  NC-17 does not necessarily mean 
 "obscene or pornographic" in the oft-accepted meaning of those words.  The 
 Board does not and cannot mark films with those words.  These are legal terms 
 and for courts to decide.  The reasons for the application of an NC-17 rating 
 can mean strong violence or sex or aberrational behavior or drug abuse or any 
 other element which, when present, most parents would want to be off-limits 
 for viewing by their children.

 Appraisal

    In any appraisal, what is "too much?" becomes very controversial.  How much 
 is "too much" violence?  Are classic war films too violent with scenes of 
 marines storming a beach and slaying hundreds, wounding thousands?  Is is the 
 graphic cop killing, the gangster shoot-out, or the slap across the face of a 
 woman that determines "too much?"  How much is "blood spilled" to be given 
 emphasis?  Where is the line to be drawn between "this is alright" and "this 
 is not alright?"
    The same vexing doubts occur in sex scenes or those where language rises on 
 the Richter scale, or where behavior not considered "normal" is revealed on 
 the screen.  What follows is disagreement, inevitable, inexorable, and 
 oftentimes strident.  That is what the rating system has to endure and 
 confront.  We understand that.  We try to do our level best so that most 
 parents would find our ratings mostly accurate and mostly useful.
    But, importantly, we urge and implore parents to care about what their 
 children see and watch, to focus their attention on movies so they can know 
 more about a film before they consent to their children watching it.
    To oversee the Rating Board, the film industry has set up a Policy Review 
 Committee consisting of officials of MPAA and NATO.  These men and women set 
 guidelines for the Rating Board to follow, and make certain that the Board 
 carries them out reasonably and appropriately.
    Because the rating program is a self-regulatory apparatus of the film 
 industry, it is important that no single element of the industry take on the 
 authority of a "czar" beyond any discipline or self-restraint.

 Advertising and Trailer Policy

    Film advertising is part of the film industry's self-regulatory mechanism.
    All advertising for rated motion pictures must be submitted to the 
 Advertising Administration for approval prior to its release to the public.  
 This includes, but is not limited to, print ads, radio and TV spots, 
 pressbooks, videocassette packaging and theatrical and home video trailers.
    Trailers are an important aspect of the program.  They are approved for 
 "all audiences," which means they may be shown with all feature films, or 
 "restricted audiences," which limits their use to feature films rated R or 
 NC-17.  There will be, in "all audience" trailers, no scenes that caused the 
 feature to be rated PG, PG-13, R, or NC-17.
    Each trailer carries at the front a tag which tells two things: (1) the 
 audience for which the trailer has been approved, and (2) the rating of the 
 picture being advertised.  The tag for "all audience" trailers will have a 
 green background; the tag for "restricted" trailers will have a red 
 background.  The color is to alert the projectionist against mismatching 
 trailers with the film being shown on the theater screen.

 HOW THE RATING SYSTEM IS USED BY THEATER OWNERS AND VIDEO RETAILERS

    Motion picture theater owners, who co-founded the rating system in 1968, 
 were the first group in the entertainment industry to voluntarily enforce its 
 guidelines.  NATO estimates that about 85% of the theater owners in the nation 
 subscribe to the rating system, and will not admit a child under 17 to an R 
 rated motion picture with an accompanying parent or adult guardian, or admit a 
 child under 17 to an NC-17 rated motion picture under any circumstance.
    In the mid 1980's, as watching movies on videocassettes at home soared in 
 popularity, video retailers joined theater owners in embracing the voluntary 
 guidelines of the rating system.  Parents who relied on the rating system to 
 determine which films their children viewed in theaters found the information 
 provided by the rating classifications equally helpful in home video.  To 
 facilitate its use, ratings are displayed on both the videocassette package 
 and the cassette itself.
    The Video Software Dealers Association (VSDA), which is the major trade 
 association for video retailers in the United States, has strongly endorsed 
 the observance of the voluntary movie rating system by video retailers.

 THE PUBLIC REACTION

    We count it crucial to make regular soundings to find out how the public 
 perceives the rating program, and to measure the approval and disapproval of 
 what we are doing.
    Nationwide scientific polls, conducted each year by the Opinion Research 
 Corporation of Princeton, New Jersey, have consistently given the rating 
 program high marks by parents throughout the land.  The latest poll results 
 show that 75% of parents with children under 18 found the ratings to be "very 
 useful" to "fairly useful" in helping them make decisions for the movie-going 
 of their children.  This is an all time high for the rating system.
    On the evidence of the polls, the rating system would not have survived if 
 it were not providing a useful service to parents.
    The rating system isn't perfect but, in an imperfect world, it seems each 
 year to match the expectations of those whom it is designed to serve -- 
 parents of America.

