Page images
PDF
EPUB

our policy. So it has nothing to do with memory. And I have a pretty good memory.

Senator CLARK of Idaho. Now, Mr. Dietz, what latitude do managers of theaters of that type have in the placement of local advertising?

Mr. DIETZ. As far as M-G-M is concerned?

Senator CLARK of Idaho. As far as under you.

Mr. DIETZ. They have no latitude.

Senator CLARK of Idaho. No latitude?

Mr. DIETZ. No. No. But there are some managers who because of their ability have at various times been of great assistance, men I respect, and have come into my ken, so to speak, and I wouldn't at all hesitate to discuss what could be done in a local situation. Senator CLARK of Idaho. As regards advertising?

Mr. DIETZ. Yes; that is right.

Senator CLARK of Idaho. Yes. Well, now, suppose that Mr. Crull, being in Nashville, decided, having been-you did not know how long he was in the employ of your company?

Mr. DIETZ. No, I don't. I know very few of the theater managers personally.

Senator CLARK of Idaho. Yes. Suppose that he decided that he wanted so much space in newspaper A and so much space in newspaper B for the following month; would you overrule him?

Mr. DIETZ. Well, I would. You see

Senator CLARK of Idaho. Well, now

Mr. DIETZ. I have to give you-I can't answer that directly because it involves a little more than that?

Senator CLARK of Idaho. All right.

Mr. DIETZ. May I do it?

You feel it is important?

Senator CLARK of Idaho. Precisely.
Mr. DIETZ. Let us be exact about it.

Senator CLARK of Idaho. Oh, precisely. That is right.

Mr. DIETZ. When a film is produced and is about to be released my interest is creating an interest in this film, a public interest in the film: I want to lift it out of anonymity. At such times I will decide on certain appropriations. Those appropriations might be merely tentative in my mind, because the film itself may have a history in the course of its own circulation which may warrant altering the

cost.

The purpose of that advertising is to popularize the film everywhere, wherever possible, not with relation to a specific theater, necessarily. In other words, I would like to have a paper with a large circulation in its territory run advertising on that if we could afford it, and if it is warranted, for the purpose of popularizing it for all theaters who may possibly be called upon to play this film.

Therefore, in answering your question, when you reduce it to a specific manager of a theater which is one theater of many theatersnot only Loew theaters-you necessitate my answer in this elaborate

way.

Senator CLARK of Idaho. Well, just so you answer it. Now let me ask you this question: From week to week the managers-Who signs the contract with the local paper for space in your various towns? A town like Nashville?

Mr. DIETZ. Our agency.

Senator CLARK of Idaho. Your agency in that town. Your manager signs it, does he not?

Mr. DIETZ. No, no. No. You see, now, he

Senator CLARK of Idaho. Well, that is the answer, unless there is something very vital. I think a witness is always entitled to explain

an answer.

But then he does not sign it?

Mr. DIETZ. He doesn't.

You see

Senator CLARK of Idaho. O. K. Now, how is this advertising contract arrived at? Do you allow your manager a budget? Mr. DIETZ. No, sir. No, sir. I don't do that. Senator CLARK of Idaho. Suppose the local manager, Mr. Crull, wanted to run so much advertising in the local paper for the next 2 weeks. How would he go about getting authority to run it?

Mr. DIETZ. Well, he wouldn't he might ask if Metro-GoldwynMayer was interested in advertising in the papers, but he couldn't get his authority to run it.

Senator CLARK of Idaho. Well, do you sent an agent down there? Mr. DIETZ. An agent?

Senator CLARK of Idaho. From your own headquarters, to supervise placing of space in the paper.

Mr. DIETZ. Yes, quite often. Yes, sir.

Senator CLARK of Idaho. Quite often?

Mr. DIETZ. Yes, sir.

Senator CLARK of Idaho. As a matter of fact, does not a local manager have a pretty free hand in the allocation, among newspapers in a given town, of ordinary advertising copy?

Mr. DIETZ. No; he has none at all.

Senator CLARK of Idaho. Well, who does do it, then?

Mr. DIETZ. Well, I do it.

Senator CLARK of Idaho. You do it?

Mr. DIETZ. Yes.

Senator CLARK of Idaho. Suppose there are two or three newspapers in a town. Do you apportion it among the newspapers

yourself?

Mr. DIETZ. Yes, sir.

Senator CLARK of Idaho. Entirely so?

Mr. DIETZ. Yes, sir. Oh, yes, sir.

Senator CLARK of Idaho. Without reference to the local manager? Mr. DIETZ. Yes, sir; without reference to the local manager. Senator CLARK of Idaho. And Mr. Crull, then, would have no authority whatsoever to place advertising in the local newspaper? Mr. DIETZ. No, sir; none at all.

Senator CLARK of Idaho. You say he does not even sign the contract? Mr. DIETZ. No, sir.

Senator CLARK of Idaho. How do you determine what advertising you are going to place? By conversations with him?

Mr. DIETZ. No. I know about the film business.

Senator CLARK of Idaho. Yes; but I mean in any given local town. Mr. DIETZ. Well, I decide what the advertising should be in any given local town.

Senator CLARK of Idaho. And you do not consult your local managers at all?

Mr. DIETZ. No, sir; not at all.

Senator CLARK of Idaho. Well, you said there were some local managers that you gave pretty much of a free hand.

Mr. DIETZ. Oh, yes. Yes. I think you would understand, a fellow like Carter Barron here, who knows a great deal; I respect his judgment as you do.

Senator CLARK of Idaho. But your local managers have no say at all as to what advertising shall be placed in the papers of a given town?

Mr. DIETZ. Only to the extent that we have described.

Senator CLARK of Idaho. Yes.

Mr. DIETZ. Isolated cases.

Senator CLARK of Idaho. Suppose Mr. Crull or one of your managers wrote you and suggested to you that the advertising be dropped from the Nashville Banner; ordinarily would you take his word for it?

Mr. DIETZ. Well, I would certainly want to see-to hear his reason; yes.

Senator CLARK of Idaho. To hear his reason?

Mr. DIETZ. Yes; I think that would be the normal reaction to that. Senator CLARK of Idaho. Yes. And of course the publisher of the newspaper signs his contract directly with the representative from your office; is that right?

Mr. DIETZ. No; he signs directly with the representative of an advertising agency.

Senator CLARK of Idaho. Of an advertising agency?

Mr. DIETZ. Which gets commissions from his paper for getting our advertising.

Senator CLARK of Idaho. Oh, I see. Yes. Now, does the local theater owner do any other advertising other than that you have described?

Mr. DIETZ. A local theater owner may, because the local theater may have other things besides what I am advertising.

Senator CLARK of Idaho. Loew's Theater, not Loew's pictures? Mr. DIETZ. That is right.

Senator CLARK of Idaho. Not Loew's pictures?

Mr. DIETZ. Not necessarily Loew's pictures. Perhaps he has a vaudeville act or something, where he might have a cooling system. Senator CLARK of Idaho. So that your point is, in conclusion on this subject as far as I am concerned, that your local manager did this thing, in substance, but he acted without authority?

Mr. DIETZ. Yes, sir. But I would like to add this. I mean I feel very keenly about this: That I don't like to cast aspersions on this theater manager, even though you might get that implication. I must stress in this particular case the overzealousness of the man in the light of an emotional situation that was created by a piece of copy that he saw and which he felt as deeply about as I but did not understand the proper course of action.

Senator CLARK of Idaho. Well, he did not know Mr. Thalberg, did he?

Mr. DIETZ. Oh, everybody in the company knew Mr. Thalberg, and everybody in the company-or, if he didn't know him, he was a figure; he was a symbol for us.

Senator CLARK of Idaho. Yes. But you do not know how long he had even been with the company, do you?

Mr. DIETZ. No. I don't attribute any emotions to him whatsoever, and I didn't say that. It is perfectly possible that those were his emotions, and I would be inclined to believe they were.

Senator CLARK of Idaho. All right. And of your best knowledge you did nothing about it; you think you must have called the theater department, and that is all?

Mr. DIETZ. I think that for the record it might be said that anything that would protect the integrity of our actions would be a course that I would have taken under such circumstances.

Senator CLARK of Idaho. Then Fidler's untruth in this particular piece of testimony lies solely in the fact that he had Mr. Crull and yourself mixed up in this instance?

Mr. DIETZ. No; because Mr. Fidler made the statement that I wrote to every one of his papers.

Senator CLARK of Idaho. Yes; but I say in the Nashville incident he mentioned.

Mr. DIETZ. Oh, there is no question that Mr. Fidler must have gotten wind of something going on in Nashville or he wouldn't have brought this out.

Senator CLARK of Idaho. I understand, but, now, his only error in his testimony

Mr. DIETZ (interposing). But that is a big error, I mean.

Senator CLARK of Idaho. Well, now, wait. It may be a big error, but the only error in his testimony as regards the Nashville incident was, substantially, that he confused you with Mr. Crull?

Mr. DIETZ. Well, I suppose.

Senator CLARK of Idaho. Yes. Now, let us get to any other newspapers. Has any other incident of this kind been brought to your→ I am going to come to the Los Angeles Times. Let us leave out the Los Angeles Times for a moment, but aside from the Los Angeles Times, has any other incident come to your knowledge of a local manager or any of the employees of Loew's, Inc., threatening to withdraw advertising from a local newspaper?

Mr. DIETZ. I don't recall any incident of the kind.

Senator CLARK of Idaho. You do not recall any incident?

Mr. DIETZ. No, sir.

Senator CLARK of Idaho. You do not know whether Mr. Crull undertook to write any other newspapers, do you?

Mr. DIETZ. No, I don't.

Senator CLARK of Idaho. You know of no other incident in the industry-that is, in your industry, in Loew's, Inc., that you can recall? Mr. DIETZ. Yes, sir.

Senator CLARK of Idaho. Of this kind.

Mr. DIETZ. No.

Senator CLARK of Idaho. All right. Now, let us come to the Los Angeles Times. Did you ever talk to Mr. Norman Chandler about Mr. Fidler's column?

Mr. DIETZ. Never.

Senator CLARK of Idaho. Never?

Mr. DIETZ. Never.

Senator CLARK of Idaho. Now, Mr. Schenck said this morning that you were here to give us the details, as nearly as you could, of the Los Angeles Times incident. He said you said it had been settled peace

ably, or words to that effect. Mr. Fidler stated in his testimony under oath, as Senator Tobey says, that Mr. Warner, Mr. Freeman, Mr. Mayer, and others had an interview with Mr. Norman Chandler and possibly members of his staff, in which they threatened to withdraw advertising if Fidler's column was not either dropped or censored. Were you present at any of those conversations?

Mr. DIETZ. No, sir, I wasn't.

I visit the studios quite often.

My office is in New York, although

Senator CLARK of Idaho. All right, then. Well, then, have you talked with any of those people about such an occurrence?

Mr. DIETZ. Yes; I have.

Senator CLARK of Idaho. With whom have you talked?

Mr. DIETZ. I talked to Howard Stricking, and I talked to Louis B. Mayer.

Senator CLARK of Idaho. What did Mr. Mayer tell you about that situation?

Mr. DIETZ. Well, in the first place, there is a misstatement. I don't know of any situation that relates to Fidler. Let us get that clear. I don't know of any-I know of dissatisfaction with Fidler's columns, as I have expressed, but I don't know of any action that had to do with Mr. Fidler that could have any bearing on this particular thing, except that very incidental bearing of Mr. Fidler's column appearing. Now I will let you develop it.

Of

Senator CLARK of Idaho. Well, I am going to develop it. "Except that very incidental problem of Mr. Fidler's column appearing.” course, that may or may not be incidental, depending upon what weight. you give it.

Mr. DIETZ. Yes; that's right.

Senator CLARK of Idaho. Now, what did Mr. Mayer tell you about his conversation with Mr. Norman Chandler?

Mr. DIETZ. Well

Senator CLARK of Idaho. As regards withdrawing advertising from the Los Angeles Times.

Mr. DIETZ. Now, first, I think it is a fair statement to say that no advertising was ever withdrawn from the Los Angeles Times.

Senator CLARK of Idaho. Well, now, wait a minute, then. If that is a fair statement let us analyze it, and then we will go on. You say that the advertising was not withdrawn. Do you mean to imply by that statement that it was no cut down to the contract minimum? Mr. DIETZ. Contract minimum? Contract minimum? You seeSenator CLARK of Idaho. Now, that is a simple question.

Mr. DIETZ. I understand. I know. I am not going to do anything but try to clarify it for you. I am not confident of what our contract minimum is with the Los Angeles Times. Bear in mind

Senator CLARK of Idaho. I am not talking about your contract. I am talking about Mr. Mayer's contract.

Mr. DIETZ. Bear in mind-Mr. Mayer has no contract with the Los Angeles Times.

Senator CLARK of Idaho. I see.

Mr. DIETZ. Bear in mind that only recently the whole system of doing advertising in Los Angeles has undergone certain alterations. Prior to a couple of months ago the advertising in Los Angeles was never bought directly by distributors such as Metro-Goldwyn-Mayer.

« PreviousContinue »