Prompt: Many museums charge for admission while others are free. Do you think advantage of charging people for admission to museum outweigh the disadvantages?

It has become a controversial topic and many argue that the museum should levy fees to visitors. I opine with this line of thought and will enunciate upon both aspects of the debate before reaching an appropriate conclusion. Ċ On the one hand, entry fees of the museum to the tourists have many benefits for the institution. Firstly, the management can well maintain the ancient artefacts with the funds collected through the visitors. The managing committee does not have to rely on external donations. Secondly, the target audience who have an interest in historical events will only visit the place. This audience will have more opportunity to learn as window shoppers will stay from visiting. Finally, the income generated from the fees will help in the growth of the museum. This fund can be utilized to purchase more ancient artefacts from any part of the globe. For example, Gandhi Ashram, one of the major attraction of the city, has been recently refurbished with the money collected from the tourists. Ċ On the other hand, the only demerit of levying visiting charges is that the underprivileged people will be deprived of the knowledge and the entertainment from the national property. These people have the same rights on these articles as the ones who are rich. For instance, there are many poor people who follow Mahatma Gandhiji ideology but are unable to visit his museum because of hefty entry charges. Ċ To sum up, undoubtedly, considering the shortfall that people with less money will be not able to visit the museum. However, I am of the firm opinion that the merits of imposing the entry fees are far many, as aforementioned, and outweighs the disadvantages as it helps the institution to develop and maintain without depending upon grants.