Many museums charge for admission while others are free.
Do you think the advantages of charging people for admission to museums outweigh the disadvantages?
Admission policy of museums is always a controversial issue. From my point of view, charging entry fees does not create more benefits than providing free admission because this type of organizations usually could gain more from other sources, such as donations and selling artifacts.
The most significant advantage of charging no admission fee is that it could bring more visitors. The increases of people not only promote a museum but also enhance its income. Take my personal experience as an example. Last time my friends and I planned a trip. We wanted to find a balance between travel spending and the variety of attractions we plan to go. As such, the spending on entry ticket became a critical factor for us to determine whether we should visit historical sites or not. Furthermore, according to an official survey in the UK, admission fees does not actually account for the largest proportion of museum's earning. It indicates museums rely more on donations and the profits created by the secondary spend of admissions.
On the other hands, the opposite opinions primarily focus on that providing zero admission charge will damage the financial position of museums. The reason is that operating and maintaining a place to preserve culture and historical artifacts are not easy jobs. It requires a sufficient income to pay for bills and the salaries of museum's staffs. However, it is possible to offset this lost income by raising income from donations such as implementing a proactive donations strategy.
In conclusion, although charging admission fee can increase the income of museums, in my opinion, providing free entry to people can bring more positive effects and the increasing of tourists might even improve museum's income.