Part 6: Cross-Text Matching · C1 Reading & Use of English

Practice activity

Should Museums Charge for Entry?

Read the four experts' opinions below. For each question, choose the text (A, B, C, or D) whose writer expresses the stated opinion.

AHelena Cross — museum director

Free admission is a principle I defend without hesitation. Public collections belong to the public, and a ticket price — however modest — sends a quiet message that culture is a commodity rather than a right. When our gallery abolished entry fees a decade ago, visitor numbers from lower-income postcodes rose sharply within the first year.

Critics claim that free museums become crowded and underfunded. Crowding can be managed with timed slots; funding should come from taxation and philanthropy, not from turning the door into a toll booth. A society that charges people to see their own heritage has misunderstood what heritage is for.

BDiego Alvarez — cultural economist

I sympathise with the idealism of free entry, but idealism does not pay for climate control, specialist conservation, or world-class temporary exhibitions. Many institutions that dropped fees later discovered that gift-shop revenue and donations failed to fill the gap left by ticket sales.

A modest charge, with generous concessions and regular free days, strikes a workable balance. It generates reliable income while remaining accessible. Treating all visitors as identical — equally able or unable to pay — is not progressive; it is simply imprecise.

CAmara Okonkwo — education officer

The debate too often reduces museums to either free temples of culture or commercial venues. What matters more is what happens once people are inside. I have worked in free museums where interpretation was thin and school programmes under-resourced, and in charging museums that transformed young visitors' understanding of history.

Entry policy is only one lever. Investment in outreach, multilingual guides, and partnerships with schools can do more for genuine inclusion than the presence or absence of a ticket desk. We should stop treating the price of admission as a complete philosophy of access.

DLars Bergström — tourism analyst

From a tourism perspective, free national museums function as loss leaders: they draw visitors into a city, who then spend on hotels, restaurants and transport. The economic return to the wider destination often dwarfs any revenue a ticket might raise for the institution itself.

That said, local taxpayers sometimes resent subsidising attractions used heavily by overseas tourists. A dual pricing model — free or discounted for residents, full price for non-residents — is used successfully in several countries and deserves wider consideration. Universal free entry is not the only fair arrangement.

Question 1

Which writer argues that free entry alone does not guarantee meaningful public access?

Answer for question 1

Question 2

Which writer defends free admission as a matter of cultural rights rather than commercial logic?

Answer for question 2

Question 3

Which writer proposes different prices for local residents and visitors from elsewhere?

Answer for question 3

Question 4

Which writer believes a small charge with concessions is a more realistic funding model?

Answer for question 4