Also you NEVER know what someone is going to find offensive. One school
returned a copy of the documentary FILM BEFORE FILM because it contained the
nude torso motion studies from the 19th century.
I long ago gave up trying to judge a film's content for who might be upset
by it.
Jessica Rosner
Kino
----------
>From: Leslie Andersen <LeslieA@LHQSMTP.COLAPL.ORG>
>To: Multiple recipients of list <videolib@library.berkeley.edu>
>Subject: Pricing, labelling -Reply
>Date: Wed, Dec 8, 1999, 12:35 AM
>
>Becky - Labeling for some things such as you mention
>(public performance rights, closed captioning, etc.) doesn't
>create any intentional problems as I can see. However,
>putting an additional label for the MPAA rating is treading
>on tenuous ground.
>
>The MPAA rating system is a PRIVATE, VOLUNTARY
>system developed by the MPAA to assist PARENTS in
>regulating their children's viewing. That is all it is for. It has
>no other purpose (see www.mpaa.org). If a library attaches
>a G, PG, R, etc. label they are thereby endorsing or
>agreeing with that rating. Therefore, if a parent comes to
>you and says, "Why did you let my child check out that R
>video?" and you have an R label on it, your defense loses
>credibility. Without that label, you can simply explain the
>MPAA rating system and its intentions. In this case,
>labeling of this type does violate ALA's Labeling Statement
>IMHO, and puts you in a bad position. As far as I'm
>concerned, libraries should not be using the rating system
>at all when making collection or public service decisions. It
>doesn't have anything to do with us and you are not
>providing better public service by emphasizing it; just the
>opposite.
>
>+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
>Leslie Andersen
>Non-Print Materials Evaluator
>County of Los Angeles Public Library
>
>