Movies have come a long way from the black and white and no sound. It seems as if each decade movies have evolved and with that comes issues. For example, movies are becoming increasingly more difficult to rate for audiences, especially children.
Movies have not always been under the protection of the First Amendment. In fact motion pictures didn’t become protected under the First Amendment until 72 years after they were made in 1952 (Albosta, 2009, pp.118-120). It might seem as a blessing that movies were finally able to be protected by laws, but in actuality, movies were put under more scrutiny. People did not want the government to regulate their freedoms, but also wanted them to protect their children from obscene content. This led to …show more content…
The author makes a solid point by saying the MPAA members have a conflict of interest. Members have the responsibility to rate movies unbiasedly while rating their own members’ movies (Albosta, 2009, p.115). Even if they are not helping each other out, it looks a bit fishy having your coworker rate your movies. Also the author feels that the MPAA are biased towards nonmember studios (Albosta, 2009, p.130). I can see the motivation for the MPAA to eliminate their completion by putting the wrong ratings for their movies. Then there is the issue of the author thinking that the MPAA help false advertise through the rating system. He feels the ratings movies receive can be misleading to audiences, which makes the MPAA responsible indirectly or directly for the false advertising (Albosta, 2009, p.136). I agree, the MPAA took on the responsibility to rate movies, and therefore should be held accountable for certain issues the movies face such as misleading ratings. It does not matter if the rating was for a certain audience such as adolescence (Albosta, 2009, p.137). What matters is that the rating should be good for the people who want to see that type of genre and if it is not the MPAA should be held accountable for the
Movies have not always been under the protection of the First Amendment. In fact motion pictures didn’t become protected under the First Amendment until 72 years after they were made in 1952 (Albosta, 2009, pp.118-120). It might seem as a blessing that movies were finally able to be protected by laws, but in actuality, movies were put under more scrutiny. People did not want the government to regulate their freedoms, but also wanted them to protect their children from obscene content. This led to …show more content…
The author makes a solid point by saying the MPAA members have a conflict of interest. Members have the responsibility to rate movies unbiasedly while rating their own members’ movies (Albosta, 2009, p.115). Even if they are not helping each other out, it looks a bit fishy having your coworker rate your movies. Also the author feels that the MPAA are biased towards nonmember studios (Albosta, 2009, p.130). I can see the motivation for the MPAA to eliminate their completion by putting the wrong ratings for their movies. Then there is the issue of the author thinking that the MPAA help false advertise through the rating system. He feels the ratings movies receive can be misleading to audiences, which makes the MPAA responsible indirectly or directly for the false advertising (Albosta, 2009, p.136). I agree, the MPAA took on the responsibility to rate movies, and therefore should be held accountable for certain issues the movies face such as misleading ratings. It does not matter if the rating was for a certain audience such as adolescence (Albosta, 2009, p.137). What matters is that the rating should be good for the people who want to see that type of genre and if it is not the MPAA should be held accountable for the