From the early days of cinema, the motion picture industry made several attempts to self-regulate the content of films to avoid the creation of numerous state and municipal censorship boards. Most of these efforts were relatively ineffectual. In 1909,
Charles Sprague Smith and about a dozen prominent individuals from the fields of social work, religion, and education, formed a committee, under the auspices of the People's Institute at
Cooper Union, to make recommendations to the Mayor's office concerning controversial films. Initially called the
New York Board of Motion Picture Censorship it soon became known as the National Board of Motion Picture Censorship. To avoid government censorship of films, the National Board became the unofficial clearinghouse for new movies. The Board's stated purpose was to endorse films of merit and champion the new "art of the people". In March 1916 the Board changed its name to the
National Board of Review of Motion Pictures to avoid the controversial word "
censorship".
National Association of the Motion Picture Industry (NAMPI) The
National Association of the Motion Picture Industry was an industry self-regulatory body created by the Hollywood studios in 1916 to answer demands for film censorship by states and municipalities. The Association devised "Thirteen Points", a list of subjects and storylines they promised to avoid. However, there was no method of enforcement if a studio film violated the Thirteen Points content restrictions, and NAMPI proved ineffective.
Motion Picture Producers and Distributors of America (MPPDA) After several risqué films and a series of notorious off-screen scandals involving Hollywood stars, political pressure was increasing, with legislators in 37 states introducing almost one hundred movie censorship bills in 1921. Faced with the prospect of having to comply with hundreds, and potentially thousands, of inconsistent and easily changed decency laws to show their movies, the studios chose self-regulation as the preferable option. In 1922, the
Motion Picture Producers and Distributors of America (MPPDA) was formed.
Will H. Hays was named the association's first president. The goal of the organization was to rehabilitate the image of the movie industry in the wake of the
Arbuckle scandal and amid growing calls by primarily Protestant groups for federal censorship of the movies. "Hiring Hays to “clean up the pictures” was, at least in part, a public relations ploy, and much was made of his conservative credentials, including his roles as a Presbyterian deacon and past chairman of the Republican Party." This effort largely failed, however, as studios were under no obligation to send their scripts to Hays's office, nor to follow his recommendations. In 1927, Hays oversaw the creation of a code of "Don'ts and Be Carefuls" for the industry. This list outlined the issues that movies could encounter in different localities. Again, despite Hays' efforts, studios largely ignored the "Don'ts and Be Carefuls," and by the end of 1929, the MPPDA received only about 20 percent of Hollywood scripts before production,
The Production Code Martin J. Quigley was publisher of
Exhibitors Herald-World (a trade magazine for independent exhibitors).
Daniel A. Lord was a Jesuit priest who had served as one of the technical consultants on
Cecil B. DeMille's 1927
The King of Kings. Quigley drafted Lord to write a code for motion pictures. With the blessing of
Cardinal George W. Mundelein of Chicago, Father Lord authored the code, which later became known as "The
Production Code", "The Code", and "The Hays Code". It was presented to Will Hays in 1930 and privately circulated by the MPPDA. The studio heads were less than enthusiastic but after some revisions, agreed to make The Code the rule of the industry, albeit with many loopholes that allowed studio producers to override the Hays Office's application of it. One main reason in adopting the Code was to avoid direct government intervention. Tasked with enforcing the code was the Studio Relations Committee, which very soon was overwhelmed by the number of films to view. The committee had a small staff and not much influence. Without the power to compel the editing of content deemed problematic, it was left with attempting to persuade the studios to make changes. From 1930 to 1934, the Production Code was only slightly effective in fighting back calls for federal censorship. The SRC was considered generally ineffective. Lord considered the code a failure. == History ==