NetNews Usenet Archive 1993 #1/NN_1993_1.iso/spool/alt/fan/rushlim/12230

Text File | 1993-01-11 | 4.6 KB | 100 lines

Newsgroups: alt.fan.rush-limbaugh
Path: sparky!uunet!wupost!eclnews!atlas!dgp
From: [e-mail] (Don Porter)
Subject: Re: Liberal media (was Re: What Liberals have done to
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
Sender: [e-mail] (News Administrator)
Nntp-Posting-Host: atlas
Organization: Washington University, St. Louis MO
References: <[e-mail]> <[e-mail]> <[e-mail]>
Date: Mon, 11 Jan 1993 21:04:59 GMT
Lines: 87

<[e-mail]> (mike myke schwartz) writes:
>> As for profitability, Michael Medeved, co-host of sneak prevues wrote a
>> book about hollywood.  In it, he claims that G rated movies do significantly
>> better at the box office, even in the 80's, yet Hollywood increased its
>> output of R rated movies from 40% of all made to 61% of all made during the
>> 80s.

<[e-mail]> (christopher stone) writes:
> Where does Medved claim this?

The title of the book is _Hollywood vs. America_.  It has a long
subtitle that I don't remember.

> I have two responses, in any case:
> 1) In the '70's, it was much easier for a movie to get a G rating than
> it is now; hence, G rated films then may have been more popular.
> But more importantly,
> 2) If what you (and Medved?) claim is true, then why have none of the top
> ten films every produced been G-rated.

Medved provides the stats in his book.  I can look up the details
and post them tomorrow if there is interest (the book is at home).
Of course, statistics can say many different things depending how
you use them.  This part of Medved's book is intended to counteract
one of the defenses of the Hollywood community.

Here is a brief (and therefore broad and rough) summary of Medved's
argument with Hollywood:

Medved:  A large proportion of movies, TV shows, and music lyrics are
offensive to the values and ideals of most Americans.

Hollywood provides 2 defenses:

1. We are only reflecting society, not trying to influence it.

    To this, Medved provides lots of counter stats showing how the world
    depicted in entertainment is vastly different than mainstream
    contemporary American life.  See the book if interested.  The topic
    above is on the second Hollywood argument.

2. We are only trying to make money.  We make movies with explicit
   content because that is what the market demands.

    This is where Medved goes into his statistical analysis to
    test if this claim is true.  His claim is that G-rated
    movies perform better at the box office than R-rated
    movies.  I don't have the exact stats here, but let me
    illustrate the idea with some made-up numbers.

  Lots of movies get made each year.  Some make a profit; some don't.
A movie producer wants to make the latter kind if his motivation
is truly making money as claimed in (2) above.  Let's say in 1992
there were 5 movies made that received a G rating.  Let's also
say that 4 of them made a profit (including one blockbuster hit)
and one bombed.  That's an 80% success rate and a 20% rate of
phenomenal success.  Say in the same year 500 R-rated movies were
made and 300 of them made a profit (including 20 blockbuster hits)
and 200 bombed.  That's only a 60% success rate and a 4% rate of
phenomenal success.  So we conclude that G-rated movies are
more likely to succeed (i.e. are more profitable) than R-rated
movies.  However, when it come time to tally up the top 10
money-makers of the year, we have 21 blockbusters.  Maybe the
G-rated film will make the cut.  Maybe it won't.

You mention the top ten films ever produced.  There are two other
issues here that help Medved's case:

1. In his book, Medved lumps together G and PG films as one category
   (supposedly "family films") and PG-13 and R films as another
   category several times.  By this grouping, there are several
   family films among the most successful ever:  Star Wars,
   Raiders of the Lost Ark, E.T.: The Extra-Terrestrial, etc.

2. These lists tend to be based on gross receipts, not on admissions,
   nor even on profit.  Thus, due to both inflation and movie ticket
   prices rising even faster than inflation, more recent films get a
   boost onto the list.

I will look through the book again tonight to be sure I haven't
misrepresented any of Medved's arguments.

--
|   Don Porter | [e-mail] | Washington University in St Louis   |
|  "The effect of liberty to individuals is, that they may do what they     |
|   please; we ought to see what it will please them to do, before we       |
|___risk congratulations." -- Edmund Burke._________________________________|