Amongst the disadvantages in living in an International Settlement in times such as these is the fact that the heavy-handed censorship of the films prevents residents from seeing pictures of incidents in connection with the war which they would greatly like to see. To all intents and purposes there is no war in progress in Europe if the fare provided in the news reels is to be taken as a criterion, and it is understood that all this is the result of a censorship which appears to be leaning backward in an endeavour to preserve a colourless neutrality. The idea in the circumstances cannot be too heavily criticized, because it is quite apparent that the intentions of the authorities are animated with praiseworthy motives, but is there not a possibility that things are being carried too far? It is understood that during the last few weeks substantial portions have been cut from news reels which appear from all information available to be harmless enough. Thus it is learned that recently a picture showing evacuated children being visited by their mothers was eliminated by the censors. So also were pictures of the grinding of lenses to be employed in making binoculars for the use of the British forces, the assembly of aircraft in Britain, and last but by no means least scenes taken in France during H.M. the King's visit to the B.EF. It is inconceivable that any of these portions of news reels could have led to breaches of the peace, though it must be admitted there might be some of the more unruly members of the community who might raise a row. More likely is it that so long as an even balance is maintained between the films taken on both sides of this struggle, reels, say, which were taken by neutral cinema concerns, would, so long as the running commentary were not obnoxious, be welcomed by all who prefer to see and hear both sides of any question. It can be readily admitted that some of the news reels might prove objectionable to certain sections of the community, and it is suggested that these can readily be spotted by the censors, but to exclude all reference to the war from what are after all news pictures does not seem to be entirely the wisest course. Logically such a censorship should be extended to the "stills" on warlike subjects which appear in the numerous publications which appear locally, and if it is contended that there is a considerable difference between a moving picture and a snapshot it may just as cogently be pointed out that the difference is negligible. The point which it is sought to make is that the policy followed by the censors appears far too narrow, and that a wider consideration of the problem seems to be indicated.
Text read from the printed page and cleaned; old type leaves the occasional error.