The Central Film Library and CFL Vision 1960 TO 1989
As with other parts of Films Division the roots of the Central Film Library(CFL) went way back to its foundation in 1927 as part of the Imperial Institute (later Commonwealth Institute) with the aim of distributing films of social and educational value. It emerged from the war time years continuing as a large, I not the largest, film library in the UK. The films it distributed were shown to audiences in schools, village halls, factory canteens and even churches. Many of the shows were put on by the CFL fleet of mobile films vans, of which there around 140 operating from 12 regional distribution bases. The film vans continued in operation until 1952 when as a consequence of financial cuts they were mostly disbanded.
During the period 1946 to 1959 the CFL had suffered in common with the rest of COI and Film Division from severe financial cuts around 1952 and the decision by Treasury to cease offering films free of charge to one where hire charges were imposed. The result was that loan of films dropped from some 7000 to 2,300 each month.
The change was not a happy one as noted in a much later Treasury note of 9 March 1967 ( NA T319/2605) which recorded the instruction that the CFL “ were no longer to promote free distribution of film material but were to adopt a passive role and a system of charges for loans sufficient to cover expenses”. The matter rumbled on, as recorded by the above Treasury note when …..in 1959 COI argued that the policy of covering costs worked against the Government’s interests in disseminating information... Treasury rejected this argument. By 1959, it is worth noting, the monthly dispatches had risen by CFL had risen to just over 4,000, still far short of the 1947 figure.
However Film Division brought the issue up again on 7 May 1964 and ”……..cited instances in which departments, to get around the instructions issued to CFL, offered free loan of film prints which they had acquired independently. It suggested that CFL should also be allowed in special cases and with specific Treasury approval, to issue films free and in the trading account make a notional credit. The occasion for this suggestion was the refusal shortly before, to allow CFL to issue without charge a film detailing the existence of Housing Improvement Grants” offered by government and the ways they could used to improve living conditions.
Despite the obvious advantages for the public and, indeed the implementation of a government policy, the Treasury held to the line of no free films until 1967 when
Mr Winterbourne Chairman of the Interdepartmental Working Party on Publicity for Technology and Engineering said that the first of the films sponsored by the Working Party with the general aim of improving the status of the Engineering Profession and thus stimulating recruitment was ready to be issued through the CFL. He invited Treasury to agree with the unanimous view of the Working Party that it was ridiculous to spend a lot of money on making films designed to persuade school leavers to consider engineering and then to put obstacles in the way of the films reaching the required audiences by making schools pay for the hire of the films.
Treasury still didn’t agree. However on 20 May 1968 the matter was escalated by the Parliamentary Secretary at the Ministry of Technology who wrote to the Chief Financial Secretary at the Treasury seeking ways around the problem by offering to pay CFL for the films to be distributed. This was not acceptable either on the grounds that once you opened the door everyone would pile in so that the proposition that distribution should pay for itself would be broken.
The argument carried on for a while and the Treasury eventually agreed to allow free distribution. This was confirmed in a letter from Don Etheridge COI Director of Finance of 8 October 1968.
By the year 1968/69 usage figures had grown steadily driven, in part, by increased use of films by industrial companies. In earlier days schools had formed the largest single class of borrower and while still an important borrowing group their numbers had not entirely recovered from the 1952 decision. In 1968 the total number of titles in distribution was about 2,000 of which some 850 were aimed at industry for training, promotion of productivity and health and safety. A breakdown of borrowing figures showed five broad categories:
Industrial users (including technical colleges) 40,773 Schools and local education authorities 11,362 Hospitals 8,003 Local authorities and public corporations 6,163 Government departments 6,155
The gradual increase in borrowing figures was welcome though surprising at the time. The spread of television had not, as some thought it might, diminished the use of film but it had been followed by an increase in the use of films for group showings. The output from CFL and its associated libraries approached 100,000 issues a year and gross annual income in 1968/69 was around £120,000 compared with £27,000 in 1953 when charges were imposed. The removal of charges for many films was very clearly to assist the growth in their distribution.
The CFL operation was not housed at COI headquarters but some miles away in West London at Bromyard Avenue, Acton. It was very much a world of its own and by the mid 1970s when Adam Leys became Head of Distribution it had not changed its location for over 20 years neither had its handling and processing arrangements. It was very much in need of some tender loving care.
Adam Leys provides a first hand memory of visiting CFL at that time:
I went to the mysterious Bromyard Avenue, where I found very nice gentle people living in a time warp. They explained all their systems to me, how they booked the 16mm films ahead, checked them out, booked them back in, and checked for damage. It was a comfortable routine. My memory says that at least one of the staff wore a brown warehouse coat, but I might have made that up.
During the course of the tour I came to the question of mailing lists. I asked if they had a mailing list of all their customers, and was proudly told that they did. Each year a new copy of the catalogue was prepared, printed and sent out to every customer who had returned a slip asking for the next edition. These slips were contained in the catalogue. When the slips were returned to CFL, three copies of the name and address of that customer were made (to my amazement) by sending the slips to the COI typing pool where they were all re-typed with carbon copies as posting labels.
The first label was used to send the next edition. The second was sent a third of the way through the year with a supplement to the catalogue showing newly acquired titles, and the third went on a second supplement to the catalogue.
So, I asked, where is the mailing list? "We mailed it!" was the proud reply!
I then had to point out that each year some customers would not return a request so there was a real danger that they had a dwindling asset and no way of reaching past customers. Oh dear, it hadn't occurred to them, and they were so pleased with their mailing list!
I went back to the COI and argued for some investment in computers and training for the CFL, and said that if they wouldn't do it the alternative was to rent out the whole Bromyard Avenue operation to management courses as a perfect example of 1940s systems, perfectly preserved. Neither happened, of course.
Since CFL was trading for many, though not all, of its films thus charging the public, it had some sort of trading account. I wondered if it was making enough money to buy computers for itself. So I asked the very nice SIO who worked for me to go to the accounts people in Croydon and ask them if CFL was making a profit or a loss. He came back the next day, giggling, and said that when he asked the question they thought for a bit and asked "Which would you like?
The other thing that happened was that at that time video cassettes were just a becoming widespread and some of the customers had video cassette players, and to their credit CFL had got some titles on to cassette as well as 16mm film. But they felt they had to 'protect' their 16mm rentals by charging the same for film and cassette. I thought this was wrong, as everyone knew the relative costs of making copies in the two formats and told them to make a VCR charge which was much less than for film, as I thought it worth encouraging the move to video. I can't now remember the name of the journalist who was the very experienced non-theatrical expert who said we had put the cat among the pigeons, as everyone else would have to follow suit, which they did.
During the 1960s and 1970s CFL had good years with a steady amount of business. As Adam has noted, toward the end of the 1970s videocassettes using magnetic tape instead of 16mm film began to make their appearance . However the machines to play videocassettes with the television sets to screen them, were relatively expensive. These two factors tended to inhibit purchase by CFL’s traditional market. Moreover there was a complication arising from the existence of two different formats of videocassette player: the Sony Betamax system and the Philips VHS system. A marketing war ensued. While the Betamax system produced marginally better quality pictures, the VHS system was cheaper and somewhat more reliable. In the end VHS won out. Nonetheless for some time CFL had to stock copies of films in both the new systems and 16mm film.
There was also an Acquisitions Operation that acquired distribution rights in a limited number of documentary films deemed useful to sponsoring departments. These documentary films sponsored for use in the UK were handled by the CFL.
In 1972 many of the issues referred to by Adam Leys were eventually solved as a consequence of a requirement to meet COI wide staff cuts of some 250 posts. The requirement followed a review of all COI activities by Sir Ronald Melville who gave a clear hint in his report, that CFL would be a good candidate for outsourcing and thereby save staff numbers. This was of course not the same as saving any money.
The COI Director of Finance Don Etheridge was tasked with looking into the possibility of out sourcing CFL to a commercial film library. He investigated several possibilities but found that they were all very small compared with CFL and their running costs were greater than those of CFL. A candidate that might have been possible, the Rank Organisation Film Library had closed a year or so earlier. He duly reported to the DG in June 1972 (NA INF 12/1253) where matters rested for the time being.
Later around the mid 1970s COI discovered an operation called the Services Sound and Vision Corporation (SSVC) that was a registered charity set up to provide the armed forces with entertainment and training film and cinema services. Its activities include the British Forces Broadcasting Service with radio and television operations.
Part of its service included an extensive film handling operation. Discussion led to the decision to outsource the handling of CFL materials. That is the storage, dispatch, returns and checking of all films and videocassettes.
The arrangements enabled Film Division to close the operation at Bromyard Avenue and make the staff savings that the Melville Report had called for. However it enabled Film Division to retain the staff and facilities involved in the marketing of the films that would remain with COI. This arrangement was important since it maintained the necessary contact with Departments.
A few years later in the early 1980s it was decided to move CFL from SSVC. The move was one of mutual benefit. Increased demands on SSVC from the armed services were causing difficulties. At the same time the expansion of the use of videocassettes as well as traditional 16 mm film suggested the need for an enhanced marketing operation for CFL.
CFL transferred to a marketing and distribution company Michael Benn Associates Ltd, who were based near Wetherby in Yorkshire. Managed by Michael Benn a lively individual, the company provided film and videocassette marketing and handling operations for a number of commercial companies. Following this re-location the name CFL was rebranded to CFL Vision.
The move proved to be very successful. The new CFL Vision was given a new image and heavily promoted using both the CFL mailing lists and others already held by Michael Benn Associates Ltd. Innovative marketing strategies were a product of the new arrangement as evidenced by the following
Note from the COI annual report of 1989:
Marketing and distribution staff have liaised closely from the outset of negotiations with clients in order to save them money by carefully planned targeting of the distribution of their films and videos through CFL Vision the Film Division marketing and distribution facility. An innovation of 1989 was to offer departments 10 tailored packages of marketing distribution to suit specific needs as well as listing films ithe CFL Vision catalogue. A number of departments took advantage of this highly targeted marketing.
The arrangements with Michael Benn Associates Ltd were to continue until the late 1990s.