Opinion
Lab
Lab
See how this opinion breaks down by gender, political spectrum and generation — and who shares your view.
Gender
AGREEDISAGREE
Male
Female
Non-binary
See how this opinion breaks down by gender, political spectrum and generation — and who shares your view.
3 comments
Museums have a wide range of benefits to individuals and society as a whole therefore should be accessible to all regardless of economic status
It would be nice in theory for museum admission to be free for locals, but in practice, it could mean museums have less money available for other important purposes.
While free museum admissions for locals would support the use and enjoyment of important cultural prospects (imagine--one could for instance go every day to the same museum during a break from work to see a different painting, or to sit in a different room and enjoy the atmosphere), in practice, it might mean there's less money for other things.
Some museums can be fully supported by increased donations and better management of costs. But, doing so would take away revenue that could be used for other important things:
Increased research capabilities
More extensive restoration efforts
More imaginative exhibitions
Furthered connections to other community projects at large, like media companies offering collaboration with other types of programming
Targeted free admission for certain groups to make a larger impact
Additionally, if government started funding museums, we could run into the problem of funds channeling only towards those areas which the government deemed worthy, leaving smaller, local specializations out of the mix. This may not be a problem, however, if the local governments of each museum are able to support free admission for locals; in these cases, the locality and specialties of each museum would be inherently supported and augmented.
Perhaps a good course of action would be to let some museums choose to be free for locals, and some not, depending on whether wealthy donors and/or local government can step in to offer support without removing/limiting an important source of revenue and thus squashing the potential for greater research and restoration efforts, among other things.
I should note that this argument depends on whether locals comprise a large proportion of the visitors to a museum. For some museums, it may be tourists which make up the majority of visitors. For others, locals may be most of the list. Local free admission may only take away from museum- and culture- enhancing revenue streams in cases where locals generate most of the ticket sales.
This point - "if government started funding museums, we could run into the problem of funds channeling only towards those areas which the government deemed worthy" - resonates hard and you've made me less sure about my position here.
Make the case or invite a friend to comment!