From Moscow to Mainstream

Ends and Beginnings Rebuilding the Big ScreenIn 1981, UNESCO reported that the vast majority of Nigeria's imported films-a whopping 86 percent-came from the United States. 1 The very same year, Hollywood studios and the US Department of State declared Nigeria hopelessly corrupt, and the Motion Picture Association of America (MPAA) called for a boycott of cinematic trade with the country.However compromised, the "new spirit of economic nationalism and self-reliance" that had emerged in Nigeria amid the oil boom of the 1970s, bolstered as it had been "by the swing to the left in Nigerian politics, and by a marked distrust of foreigners, " formed part of the boycott's backstory. 2 When the MPAA announced its boycott, Nigeria was under civilian president and former finance minister Shehu Shagari, whose Economic Stabilization Program prescribed the limiting of import licenses and the raising of customs duties-one of several policies that proved off-putting to Hollywood amid the global inflation of the 1970s and a general profit squeeze.Yet rather than exposing Nigeria's pathological status on the world stage, the MPAA's 1981 call for member studios to retreat from the country merely exemplified how, in "the neoliberal vision of world order, the world economy exercises discipline on individual nations through . . . the flight of investment that punishes expansion in social policy, " as Quinn Slobodian puts it. 3 There can be no doubt but that Hollywood benefited from the thirty or so fully licensed cinemas that operated in Lagos alone during the oil boom, when local exhibitors could afford the exorbitant rental fees imposed by the MPAA.Falling oil prices, coupled with Shagari's strategic refusal to submit to conditions outlined by the International Monetary Fund (IMF), changed all of that-at least temporarily. 4 At the very moment at which the Nigerian state, in its relatively brief configuration as Shagari's ostensibly civilian Second Republic, began to pursue concrete protectionist strategies aimed at curbing Hollywood's local influence and limiting

Ends and Beginnings Rebuilding the Big ScreenIn 1981, UNESCO reported that the vast majority of Nigeria's imported films-a whopping 86 percent-came from the United States. 1 The very same year, Hollywood studios and the US Department of State declared Nigeria hopelessly corrupt, and the Motion Picture Association of America (MPAA) called for a boycott of cinematic trade with the country.However compromised, the "new spirit of economic nationalism and self-reliance" that had emerged in Nigeria amid the oil boom of the 1970s, bolstered as it had been "by the swing to the left in Nigerian politics, and by a marked distrust of foreigners, " formed part of the boycott's backstory. 2 When the MPAA announced its boycott, Nigeria was under civilian president and former finance minister Shehu Shagari, whose Economic Stabilization Program prescribed the limiting of import licenses and the raising of customs duties-one of several policies that proved off-putting to Hollywood amid the global inflation of the 1970s and a general profit squeeze.Yet rather than exposing Nigeria's pathological status on the world stage, the MPAA's 1981 call for member studios to retreat from the country merely exemplified how, in "the neoliberal vision of world order, the world economy exercises discipline on individual nations through . . . the flight of investment that punishes expansion in social policy, " as Quinn Slobodian puts it. 3 There can be no doubt but that Hollywood benefited from the thirty or so fully licensed cinemas that operated in Lagos alone during the oil boom, when local exhibitors could afford the exorbitant rental fees imposed by the MPAA.Falling oil prices, coupled with Shagari's strategic refusal to submit to conditions outlined by the International Monetary Fund (IMF), changed all of that-at least temporarily. 4 At the very moment at which the Nigerian state, in its relatively brief configuration as Shagari's ostensibly civilian Second Republic, began to pursue concrete protectionist strategies aimed at curbing Hollywood's local influence and limiting

We welcome the opportunity to recognize those whose actions over the past decade helped to raise public awareness about the influence of smoking in movies on adolescents and to convince the Motion Picture Association of America (MPAA) to take this issue seriously.In 1998, the US Attorneys General resolved to deal with the problem of tobacco depictions in movies. In 2003, California Attorney General Lockyer contacted major tobacco companies and the MPAA to express concern about tobacco in movies. Prompted in part by our published research,1 Maryland Attorney General Curran and 27 other state attorneys general called on the MPAA and leaders in the motion picture industry to reduce smoking in movies. In response, Dr Dalton was invited to present our research findings to members of the MPAA, the Directors Guild, senior executives from the top movie production companies, and others from the motion picture industry. In 2004, Senator Ensign of Nevada held a Senate committee hearing on smoking in movies, which raised public awareness and sent a clear message to the MPAA that US legislators are concerned about the impact of smoking in movies on children.For years, public health advocates, including Stanton Glantz and members of SmokeFree Movies, have pressured the MPAA to assign “R” ratings to movies that portray smoking. Endorsement of this recommendation by the American Medical Association, American Academy of Pediatrics, and other major medical associations has helped to bring the issue to the forefront. The Legacy Foundation has supported antismoking efforts by funding research, promoting policies to reduce smoking in movies, and sponsoring antismoking public service announcements for use in theaters. State-level organizations such as Reality Check (New York) and Our Voices Exposed (Vermont) have inspired youth to become involved and communicate directly with members of the motion picture industry regarding their concern that movies are promoting smoking among youth.In response to a decade's worth of unrelenting efforts, the MPAA announced its collaboration with Harvard School of Public Health (HSPH) experts to address the issue of tobacco depictions in movies. The HSPH statement advocating eliminating smoking from youth-rated movies, publicly released in April 2007,2 was remarkably consistent with our research-based conclusions that a “practical solution to reduce children's exposure to movie smoking would be to eliminate smoking from youth-rated movies.”3 We are pleased that our work in this area, which began more than 10 years ago, provides scientific support for those who embrace the mission of changing public health policy to reduce smoking.

ABSTRACTThe film ratings system employed by the Motion Picture Association of America (MPAA) has been criticized by LGBTQ critics who claim the system discriminates by holding queer content to a higher ratings standard than content in other films. The MPAA argues the constituency for its ratings system is parents in traditional families who may find queer themes inappropriate for their children. Paradoxically, a number of organizations serving adolescents identifying as LGBTQ or as questioning their sexualities have created lists of recommended films, many of whose MPAA ratings make them virtually off-limits to teens unless their parents approve. Cyberspace is also populated with lists of films recommended for teens regardless of their sexuality and gender identity. This article compares ratings distributions for lists of films recommended for queer teens and those recommended for mainstream teens and finds evidence of negative impact on access by queer teens to potentially helpful film content.

Advisory ratings and content descriptions are assigned to motion pictures by the Motion Picture Association of America (MPAA), and represent the primary social policy in the United States for advising parents about movie content, with a goal of limiting minor children's exposure to material deemed inappropriate for their age. To examine possible historical trends in MPAA ratings information, the present study analyzed the content of PG, PG-13, and R movie rating justification phrases (e.g., “Rated PG-13 for violence and language”) applied to movies released in the years 1993–2005. A random sample of 1820 movie titles was selected, and all words in the rating justification phrases were coded as primary content terms or modifier terms. Results indicated that content terms for language, violence, and sexuality appeared frequently at all rating levels. Historical trends were found for terms indicating stronger depictions of violence and language and more mature thematic material in PG movie phrases, and more adult language, substance use, and sexual content in PG-13 movie phrases, across the sampled years, a pattern termed “ratings creep.” Policy changes and psychological processes affecting MPAA raters and the ratings process are discussed as plausible causes of ratings creep, as are implications of these ratings changes for media consumers and society at large.

In the most recent issue of Hispania, the Media/Computers Department offered the first of a two-part series in which we presented a listing of Spanish and Portuguese language films, which the Motion Picture Association of America (MPAA) had rated G, PG and PG-13. The goal of the project is to assist instructors at the K-12 level to make intelligent choices of feature length films to show in the classroom. While the list presented a modest sample of possibilities for teachers, a considerable void existed because many of the films produced in Spanish and Portuguese speaking countries do not carry an MPAA rating. The inventory presented in the second part of the series specifically consists of these films. These feature films in Spanish and Portuguese were released and rated in countries where the MPAA has no jurisdiction. The ratings used are those of the systems used in the countries in which the film was released. A key to the elements of these rating systems is located at the end of the inventory. While an extensive effort was made to provide as many offerings as possible, there is a chance that a qualifying film might be missing from the list. If this is the case, please contact Dr. Hughes.

A responsibility of the Motion Picture Association of America (MPAA) is to assign ratings to films. The purpose of this study is to test the MPAA's assertion of equal treatment of sexual and violent content when assigning a rating to a film. Critics charge that MPAA members are more restrictive toward sexual content than violent content, because they find the former more offensive. As a result, children have easier access to violent content, which may be more harmful to them than sexual material. Systematic content analysis of 52 film rating descriptions is used to test the hypotheses, which were supported.

Contrary to popular belief, motion picture piracy is not a modern phenomenon.2 Indeed, Hollywood studios have been engaged in a continuous battle against pirates ever since theatres began showing films in the late nineteenth century.3 One of the earliest methods of motion picture piracy, for example, was the “bicycling of prints,” a practice by which a theatre operator would literally transport film reels between multiple theatres by bicycle to avoid the cost of licensing reels for each.4 With the advent of the Internet, however, the rate of motion picture piracy has increased exponentially. While truly measuring the extent of such illegal activity is impossible, recent estimates by the Motion Picture Association of America (“MPAA”) suggest that somewhere between 300,000 and 350,000 motion pictures are illegally downloaded from the Internet every day.5 With Hollywood studios already losing four billion dollars in potential profits each year to analog piracy,6 the continuous growth of digital piracy threatens the very existence of the motion picture industry. It is no surprise, then, that industry trade organizations like the MPAA are now feverishly searching for an effective way to address the problems posed by digital piracy.

The little analog-to-digital converters found everywhere in computing and consumer electronics might, if the entertainment industry gets its way, become the new front line against illicit copying of movies and music. Not surprisingly, the industry's proposal to hardwire copy protection into all these converters has provoked a storm of indignation among consumer electronics producers and civil liberties groups. Concerned that movies might be redigitized, with no copy protection. The Motion Picture Association of America (MPAA) wants analog-to-digital converters to recognize a copyrighted video or audio signal and prevent it from being copied. However the MPAA's plan will be hard for others to accept. Royal Philips Electronics, joined by Microsoft and other dissenting consumer electronics companies, has already voiced dissatisfaction with the report. More manufacturers and the companies that incorporate the converters in their products are expected to follow suit and fight the MPAA proposal. Privacy advocates also are up in arms.

The term “ratings creep” refers to the belief that various types of adult content escalate in films with the same rating over time. The purpose of this study was to test the ratings creep hypothesis through a quantitative analysis of films from 1988, 1997, and 2006 in the PG-13 rating category used by the Motion Picture Association of America (MPAA). A quantitative content analysis of 45 films was conducted, and significant increases in violent content in the PG-13 rating category from Time 1 (1988) to Times 2 (1997) and 3 (2006) were found. However, similar increases in other types of adult content in the PG-13 rating category were not found. Results suggest a leniency toward violent content by the MPAA ratings board that parallels America's parents' greater comfort with children being exposed to violence than other types of adult content—sex, for example—in the unrestricted PG-13 rating category.

Illegal online drug sellers: How to stop them?

Monopolies and industry concentration have returned in our time, as did the ramifications in the globalized political economy. One of the most impactful in our daily lives are the Mass Media Conglomerates who not only own the majority of film, television, and news we access, but increasingly control the means of accessing it, from cable to digital. While many are familiar with these corporations via their services and products, less known by the public are their political operations and close cooperation with Washington. This is due to the lack of holistic analysis of the industry and cooperation in the media oligopoly. Especially lacking is the focus on trade associations in the political process. As such, this dissertation analyzes the role of the prominent trade association for the film industry—the Motion Picture Association of America (MPAA). The MPAA was formed in the early days of Hollywood’s film dominance, and today is one of the most prominent and notorious trade associations in promoting neoliberal development. These changes include transnationalized production and distribution, Intellectual Property Rights extensions, and invasive trade agreements to name a few. The influence and power to do so goes beyond lobbying, by instrumentalizing their industry, incorporating state bureaucracies, and developing an international structure that enhances corporate political power. The results have been an ever-growing consolidation that branches into related sectors and industries of communication and technology. With this such trade associations like the MPAA become more representative and hold more political leverage, which is increasingly used on the global arena and impacting the foreign and domestic policy of many states far beyond Hollywood.

The purpose of this study was to determine whether the Motion Picture Association of America's ratings system distinguishes among the 3 primary rating categories (PG, PG-13, and R) with respect to violence based on a study of the 100 top-grossing films of 1994. The Motion Picture Association of America assigns age-based ratings for every film that is released in the United States accompanied by the reasons for the rating. A data abstraction instrument was designed to code each act of violence within the sample of 100 films. A series of Poisson regression models were used to examine the association among rating, seriousness of violence, and primary reason for the rating assignment. The total average number of violent acts within each film by rating category increased from PG (14) to PG-13 (20) to R (32). However, using results from the Poisson models, it is clear that the rating does not predict the frequency of violence in films. For all 3 rating categories, the predicted number of violent acts is almost identical for films with violence as a primary descriptor and films with the highest level of seriousness (R = 62.4 acts, PG-13 = 55.2 acts, and PG = 56.1 acts). The regression analysis shows that the rating does not predict the frequency of violence that occurs in films. Frequency of violence alone is not the most important criterion for the assignment of rating. The content descriptors and average seriousness of films are better measures of the violence than rating assignment.

The Effectiveness of the Motion Picture Association of America's Rating System in Screening Explicit Violence and Sex in Top-ranked Movies From 1950 to 2006

THE FILM RATING SYSTEM, ESTABLISHED in 1968 by Motion Picture Association of America (MPAA), has remained remarkably consistent in structure throughout its history. Apart from some minor tweaks, first-and to date, onlymajor change came in 1984, when string of controversial features led to creation of PG-13: Parents strongly cautioned. Some material may be inappropriate for children under 13. This new classification was intended to bridge gap PG and restricted R classification. If system is intended to reflect current sentiment of parents and mirror contemporary concern (Why: History of Ratings), can this amendment suggest important changes in society, particularly in relation to views of horror and childhood?Regrettably, importance of PG-13 has been systematically downplayed, often even ignored, in academic context. In Stephen Vaughn's critical account of system's history, for instance, author frames introduction of PG-13 around several cases of controversies of early 1980s, most of which surprisingly refer not to PG or PG-13 films but to R and classifications and their clearly flawed appeals process (109). The importance of restricted side of ratings spectrum is so overpowering that author concludes his analysis of PG-13 with caveat there was still nothing to categorize area R and X (120). In any case, Vaughn does subtly hint at why PG-13 may be important on its own: violence and horror in Spielberg's family films such as Poltergeist (1982, dir. Tobe Hooper) and Indiana Jones and Temple of Doom (1984, dir. Steven Spielberg), which were awarded PG with minor struggle; films were key to creation of PG-13 (Vaughn 114-15) and prompted debates around distinction between teenagers and preteens (Vaughn 117).This is point worthy of much deeper consideration, particularly given heated controversy generated by Temple of Doom upon release. Its violence and gore surprised viewers and upset parents, prompting Paramount to insert warning in its advertisements for film (This film may be too intense for younger children) and leading Spielberg to clarify that he would not let ten-year-old see one of film's most violent sequences (Harmetz 48). But if Temple of Doom was the last straw . . . that broke back of support for single PG rating (Goodman C5), its critical reception was, like that of Poltergeist, mostly positive. The issues around PG-13 become more complex when third PG-rated, family-friendly film, Gremlins (1984, dir. Joe Dante), is considered as part of group of PG-13 instigators. Unlike its predecessors, Gremlins provoked strong critical ambiguity and an eruption of anxieties over not only film's violence but also its tone and ideology, which seemed to be closer to horror than family film. That PG-13 would then be perceived as a sop to pressure, not as an initiative (Champlin 77), suggests early to mid-1980s as period of transformation in social and cultural perceptions in which PG-13 surfaced as marker of new boundaries for childhood as well as horror genre.Debates about film system have been preoccupied mainly with topics of censorship and child protection, usually discussed separately. Discussions over censorship tend to limit themselves to restricted end of ratings spectrum and detail problems surrounding and NC-17 ratings, and authors who focus on child protection largely discuss system's scope and competence of its classifications, sometimes defending change from age-based ratings to detailed content descriptions.1 Although debates differ, concerns raised on each side often meet specifically in questioning of system's integrity and MPAA's right to moral authority, as well as consequences of power it wields in Hollywood. …