DRAFT 2 OF LCRI 25.5B ON UNIFORM TITLES FOR
MOTION PICTURES, TELEVISION PROGRAMS,
AND RADIO PROGRAMS

Since the Library of Congress Motion Picture, Broadcasting, and Recorded Sound Division (M/BR/S) uses Archival and Moving Image Materials, 2nd ed. (AMIM2) in cataloging moving image materials, there has been little guidance in LCRI 25.5B with respect to the AACR2 approach to the application of uniform titles to these materials. The Cataloging Policy and Support Office (CPSO) has been aware of this lacuna for some time, the most recent reminder being questions stimulated by an attempt by LC's Cooperative Cataloging Team to develop an FAQ on uniform titles and a paper written by Greta de Groat, Stanford University (Discussion Paper--Uniform Titles for Moving Image Materials OLAC CAPS Meeting ALA Midwinter, 2001). CPSO, working with the Program for Cooperative Cataloging (PCC) Standing Committee on Standards (SCS) has attempted to address this lacuna for PCC libraries.

The first draft of LCRI 25.5B on uniform titles for motion pictures was posted for comment in the period January-March 2003. There was a consensus among almost all the respondents on three points:

1. disagreement with the proposal not to use a uniform title to break a conflict between a moving image resource and another bibliographic resource;
2. lack of a proposed treatment for television programs;
3. the questionable inclusion in an LCRI of the guidelines stating the actual practice provided for by Archival Moving Image Materials, 2nd ed. (AMIM2).

Some respondents thought the proposal called for the use of qualification in cases not really needing qualification.

This second draft of LCRI 25.5B attempts to address these concerns:

1. by calling for use of a uniform title to distinguish between a moving image resource or a radio program entered under a title proper from another bibliographic resource entered under that same title;
2. by including a proposed treatment of television programs and radio programs;
3. by omitting a statement of actual AMIM2 practice and substituting instead notation, at the appropriate places, where AMIM2 practice differs from the proposed AACR2 practice;
4. by limiting the use of qualifiers to cases of breaking conflicts.

The second draft proposes a treatment of silent films with intertitles released under different titles parallel to the treatment of films with subtitles released under different titles. It also proposes a treatment applicable to instances of individual titles that are also part of comprehensive titles.

Although LC's Motion Picture, Broadcasting, and Recorded Sound Division uses AMIM2 for cataloging motion pictures and television programs (but not for radio programs), we have been able to draw on their experience and receive advice from them in various matters relating to the cataloging of moving image materials and radio programs.

The second draft is presented in sections on motion pictures, television programs, and radio programs. One of the thorniest questions addressed is the treatment of individual titles associated with a comprehensive title, e.g., an episode of a theatrical serial or an episode of a television series. One approach is to treat a comprehensive title as a 4XX series title. This entails, however, judging whether an individual title, e.g., Chuckles bites the dust, which may be "distinctive," can stand on its own or whether it is only meaningful within a string that includes the comprehensive title: Mary Tyler Moore. Chuckles bites the dust. In order to deal with uniform titles applicable to these titles, it is necessary to make recommendations that affect how such materials are cataloged.

The second draft proposes that with respect to the treatment of comprehensive/individual title situations a distinction be made between theatrical serials and television and radio series as they were originally distributed and/or broadcast and publisher or distributor series that are used to group motion pictures or television and radio programs. For the former, we propose to treat the title proper in a combined structure consisting of the components applicable to a particular title. Thus for motion pictures intended to be viewed consecutively, for newsreels, and for all television and radio programs in television and radio series, the title proper will always consist of a comprehensive title and either an individual title or a "designation of part" (e.g., episode number, chapter number) or both. Publisher or distributor series used to group motion pictures or television and radio programs would be treated as series statements.

CPSO concludes that it is better to treat the materials proposed for the structured combined comprehensive/individual title approach in that manner for the following reasons:

1. it is a simpler model to apply;
2. it precludes the need to develop guidelines to determine what is an "independent" title;
3. it is more likely to result in more consistent treatments within a shared environment;
4. it is often the archival approach and contributes to consistent treatment in that regard;
5. there is evidence, as noted in Martha Yee's comments on Greta de Groat's paper, that episode titles of television series are not always consistently presented or apparent and they are not always that well known by users.

CPSO proposes that in cases of structured combinations of comprehensive title/individual title that need qualification, the entire string be treated as the title proper and that any qualifier be put at the end of the entire title proper.

Please send comments by January 15, 2004 to the CPSO email account: cpso@loc.gov

• Cataloging Policy and Support Office Home Page
• Cataloging Directorate Home Page
• Library of Congress Home Page