Letter: Museum charges
Your support helps us to tell the story
From reproductive rights to climate change to Big Tech, The Independent is on the ground when the story is developing. Whether it's investigating the financials of Elon Musk's pro-Trump PAC or producing our latest documentary, 'The A Word', which shines a light on the American women fighting for reproductive rights, we know how important it is to parse out the facts from the messaging.
At such a critical moment in US history, we need reporters on the ground. Your donation allows us to keep sending journalists to speak to both sides of the story.
The Independent is trusted by Americans across the entire political spectrum. And unlike many other quality news outlets, we choose not to lock Americans out of our reporting and analysis with paywalls. We believe quality journalism should be available to everyone, paid for by those who can afford it.
Your support makes all the difference.Sir: There is no statistical evidence whatsoever to prove that visitor numbers to our museums decreased after charging was introduced. In fact figures quoted in David Lister's article "Museum's which charge lose a third of visitors" (27 November) are fictitious.
Before charging was introduced, without an electronic ticketing system, there was simply no accurate way of counting visitors. Visitor numbers were grossly over-estimated, unaudited and often "best guesses".
We are not advocating charging for museums per se, but all museums are expensive to run and none of them has been properly funded by government for years. However, we believe that charging for admission does not stop people from visiting museums. The report of recent research commissioned by the Museums and Galleries Commission (the Government's advisers on museum policy) said that "any reported impacts of charges on visitor numbers are of questionable reliability".
Only 4 per cent of those questioned in this research who did not visit museums cited admission charges as the deterring factor. Moreover, a clear majority expects to contribute to museums' finances according to use, and lack of time to visit museums is a much greater constraint than an admission charge.
Whatever the Government's decision it must provide adequate funding for all national museums and galleries, instead of subjecting them to the miserable cheese-paring of the last decade. If charging were abolished, and the revenues not completely compensated by government, the results would be disastrous. No more effective way of denying access to the public could be imagined.
Dr NEIL CHALMERS
Director, The Natural History Museum
ROBERT CRAWFORD
Director, Imperial War Museum
JOHN FREEBORN
Deputy Director, The Royal Air Force Museum
RICHARD ORMOND
Director, The National Maritime Museum
London SW7
Join our commenting forum
Join thought-provoking conversations, follow other Independent readers and see their replies
Comments