An increasing number of museums tend to charge admission fees from tourists rather than providing service free of charge. Do you think the advantages outweigh the disadvantages?

There are reasons for such proposal. Firstly, charging admission keeps a museum run healthily because it provides museums some funding for maintenance and expansion. As we generally know, building a museum with special characters and functions costs substantially more money than an ordinary residential building. Operation spending including security, staff salary and enriching the collections also need constant financial support. If all this cost has to come from taxation, that would be unfair to some taxpayers who do not visit museums at all. Also charging admission can compensate publicly funded museums for cuts in subsidy granted by the government and do not drop their service quality and security. Meanwhile this would not threaten other independent competitors which rely on their income from entry fees.

However, some people disagree with charging entry because they are convinced of some adverse impacts on the society. It is true that a museum is a venue about learning and enjoying as well. It is the access to vivid presentation of knowledge and local culture and history, and charging admission would decrease the number of visits, hence undermining the inspiration for knowledge and cultural heritage preservation and transmission. Another concern about charging admission of a museum is that a museum, as an important educational resource, may lose its educational function because some students in a disadvantaged position would be deprived of a museum tour.

In conclusion, although free access to a museum can promote culture and education, it leads to financial pressure on a museum. Accordingly students should be given a preference treatment and this can be effective with the government’s constant funding for student museum visit. Adults should be charged of admission to a museum. A virtual museum can be another promising option for those less well-off because it is much cheaper to build and run, and therefore can be provided free.