The Motion Picture Association of America (MPAA) is the trade group that represents the major film studios. It manages the US film rating system and could fix the problem of smoking in movies.

The MPAA's powerful film industry board members have so far failed to reach consensus about the on-screen smoking problem. Instead, for the past decade, the MPAA has employed public relations tactics to confuse and minimize the issue. (Fact check MPAA assertions about tobacco and ratings.)

TIME LINE

2003 | Twenty-seven Attorneys General write the Motion Picture Association of America (MPAA) expressing concern about the growth of smoking in the movies and its effect on teens.

2004 | Dan Glickman succeeds Valenti as president of the MPAA. However, Valenti continues to represent the studios on smoking in films and to oppose an R-rating.

2005 | Thirty-two AGs write the MPAA and studios, urging them to include an anti-smoking ad on movie DVDs that include smoking.

September 7, 2006 | Forty-one AGs again write the MPAA and studios renewing their call for anti-smoking ads. To make it easy, they included three Truth® ads from the American Legacy Foundation, which studios could use at no cost. Only The Weinstein Company accepts the offer.

October 5, 2006 | MPAA’s Glickman tells the AGs that the MPAA has invited recommendations from the Harvard School of Public Health and will work to "gain consensus" among its member studios to implement them.

February 23, 2007 | Consistent with Smoke Free Movies' policy solutions, Harvard recommends that the MPAA "take substantive and effective action to eliminate the depiction of tobacco smoking from films accessible to children and youths..."

May 1, 2007 | After Harvard’s recommendations are made public on April 3, thirty-one AGs follow up with another letter to the MPAA, studios and Guilds containing the strongest language to date:

[E]ach time a member of the industry releases another movie that depicts smoking, it does so with the full knowledge of the harm it will bring to children who watch it...

[E]liminate the depiction of tobacco smoking from films accessible to children and youth. There is simply no justification for further delay.

May 10, 2007 | The MPAA announces that it will “consider” tobacco imagery in the ratings starting immediately. However, it does not bind itself to take any particular action after reviewing films with smoking.

Leading health organizations quickly denounced the MPAA’s placebo policy as inadequate. They pledge to keep pressing for the R-rating and other measures that can substantially and permanently reduce adolescent exposure. (Statements from the American Medical Association, American Heart Association, American Legacy Foundation, and Campaign for Tobacco Free Kids were typical.)

June 5, 2007 | Vermont Attorney General William H. Sorrell, a leader among AGs on tobacco issues, informs the MPAA that AGs are "witholding judgement" on the effectiveness of the MPAA’s plan and requests more specific information from the MPAA, which is not provided. Later that year, the AG declines to meet with the MPAA.

May 2009 | After two years, independent researchers report that the MPAA’s rating practices have had virtually no effect on youth exposure to on-screen smoking and give consumers no reliable guidance on films’ tobacco content.

June 2, 2009 | Attorney General Sorrell writes the CEOs of the media companies that own the film studios:

…I urge all studios to fulfill the Harvard School of Public Health’s recommendation that studios eliminate the depiction of tobacco use from films accessible to youth. The evidence of its negative consequences is now inescapable. Moreover, as this evidence growsd, it is clear that every time the industry releases another movie that depicts smoking, it does so with full knowledge of the deadly harm it will bring to children who watch it.

MPAA and clean indoor air laws

On April 22, 2009, the MPAA interrupted North Carolina Senate debate on landmark smokefree workplace legislation to demand a loophole for smoking in film productions. “The motion picture industry worries the bill would prevent actors from smoking on screen,” reported the Associated Press.

News stories claimed, erroneously, that major film production centers like California and New York already exempt film productions; in fact, only Massachusetts exempts films, and only if local authorities approve. Florida explicitly rejected such an exemption in 2002. New York City exempts live theatrical productions, but only with a state-granted waiver. Currently, the only waiver in NYC is for a Philip Morris product testing lab.

“The Motion Picture Association of America is against the [N.C. smokefree workplace] proposal, saying it would likely mean pulling out of the state,” reported an ABC (Disney) affiliate. The bill signed into North Carolina law on May 19, 2009, exempts smoking by performers on a “motion picture, television, theater or other live production set.”