By: Mariana Gurevich
When we visit the Metropolitan Museum of Art, we are compelled to donate as much money as we can to the institution. Since the admission fee is simply suggested and not necessarily required, many claim that they have been misled by the museum’s pricing, and are looking for compensation. The MET hits so close to home with our IDC class, which focuses on arts in NYC, and due to the museum’s placement in the heart of the city. Sarah Lyall’s article, “Seeking Clarity on Fees at the Metropolitan Museum” caught my eye for exactly this reason. In her piece, she discusses a controversy that has been brewing about the entrance fee at this renowned museum.
At the moment there are two court cases in the works against the Metropolitan Museum of Art. One lawsuit accuses the museum of deceiving its visitors and thus concludes that the MET is guilty of fraud. This case believes that the public is being misled about the pricing with the help of the giant board that hangs behind the cashiers, which lists recommended fees in a big font when in reality people don’t necessarily have to pay. The second class-action suit again the museum is seeking recompense for people who claim that they were duped by the institution’s suggested charge. Both of these cases were brought upon the museum by five visitors, one of which is a consistent critic of the museum on several matters. Two others involved are Czech citizens and are responding to an Internet appeal for people who claim that they had been misled into paying the full suggested admissions price.
I personally have been to the MET several times, and I can see where these two lawsuits are coming from. I was definitely confused about the suggested fee, and when I found out that I didn’t have to pay the entire sum, it was still slightly embarrassing to only give the museum a small donation. Since I am a New Yorker and found the pricing ambiguous, it becomes more understandable as to why certain foreigners feel misled. On the other hand, certain signs in the museum detail that the prices are recommended. No one was forced to give their money to the MET, especially since the visitors could have easily asked the cashiers what the pricing was, and thus I don’t think compensation is necessary.
In this article, the MET’s senior vice president, Harold Holzer, and the museum’s lawyers do a good job of explaining why they are not wrong in this situation by clarifying the pricing policies of the museum. In the 1870s, the state allowed the Parks Department to set aside land for a grand new art museum that the city could be proud of. A deal was reached in which the museum would have to be free of charge and accessible to the public four days a week. Later on, in 1893, the state legislature enacted a law that changed the pricing schedule. The museum must allow free admission on five days and two nights a week, but was allowed to charge admission during the remaining times. In the early 1970s, the museum was running a deficit so its director Thomas Hoving asked the city for permission to charge general admission daily. The City Council responded with a warning, “A penny today may be a dollar tomorrow.” Still, a deal was reached between Hoving and August Hecksher, the direct of the city’s Department of Parks, Recreation and Cultural Affairs. This deal allowed the museum to charge a fee as long as the amount was “left entirely to the individual’s discretion.”
Overall, I believe that the cases brought against the MET are unjust, but the museum could definitely make it clearer that pricing is simply recommended, not mandatory. The only problem I have with the MET right now is that there are Internet deals on sites like Groupon, which offer discounted tickets, but fail to point out that paying at this institution is already optional. I think that these offers on the Internet must be stopped for they are misleading. I also believe that the museum as a whole could be clearer about its suggested fees. Otherwise though, it’s sad to see these two cases being brought against the MET because it is such a crucial and beautiful part of the city. If the Met loses in court, it could end up forfeiting $40 million in annual revenue which is about 16% of their operating budget. Thus, if the museum was more open about their pricing policy, a lot of this could have been avoided in the first place.
What are your thoughts on this topic? Do you think the cases brought against the MET are fair? Do you think the Internet deals, on Groupon for instance, are misleading? Tell me in the comments below!
Lyall, Sarah. “Seeking Clarity on Fees at the Metropolitan Museum.” New York Times. 7 Oct. 2013. Web. 7 Oct. 2013. <http://www.nytimes.com/2013/10/08/arts/design/seeking-clarity-on-fees-at-the-metropolitan-museum.html?_r=0&adxnnl=1&ref=arts&pagewanted=2&adxnnlx=1381205923-6iwcBCH1YDYwTumAcUtieg>.
Transparency is becoming a major issue, not only in politics, but also in arts. Although I haven’t been subjected to this misunderstanding, I can see why people are easily misled. This scenario reminds me of the debate on fine printing in advertisement. Fine print often excludes the information that could change one’s perspective on things. Since we disprove of the use of fine print, I think we can also agree that it is unethical to mislead people, especially tourists, who are genuinely interested in New York City’s arts.
After reading your article, I decided to check the museum’s website for any misleading phrases that imply a mandatory entry fee for the museum. However, as expected, the website clearly places the listed prices in the “Recommended” category and further adds that they request visitors to pay full recommended price so they can fund the exhibitions. Thus, the claim of being misled is unfounded.
Ultimately, the museum directors can only ensure that their instructions are clear; the rest lies in our hands. It is our responsibility to be aware of the customs and procedures of a place we intend to visit. Whether we choose to go on the MET’s website and search for the admission fee is solely up to our own discretion.
I agree with everything you are saying in your post. First of all, sites offering discounts, like Groupon, are being very misleading – there’s no point in offering a coupon to something that has optional pricing, and it can only confuse people. The museum itself could do a better job of making it clear that the prices are recommended, not mandatory.
However, I do not believe that the two court cases could win in court. If the MET posted the prices as recommended prices, even in small print, then I don’t believe that they are legally bound to change anything. Is it misleading? Possibly. But that doesn’t mean that it is legally wrong. And the amount of money that they could be losing seems outrageous. I don’t even think that Groupon could be sued for this – they are being misleading, but not doing anything illegal. (Well, I’m not sure on this, as businesses have to act in a fair manner, and I don’t know business laws too well in this area).
It’s true that the MET and other arts institutions in NYC attract tourists and foreigners, and while it would be nice for them to be helpful and cater to their cultures, I don’t believe that they are legally required to. The business culture in NYC and in America as a whole is different from other countries – it would be nice if it was more consumer friendly, but I don’t see this happening too soon.
The MET’s pricing formats are definitely confusing. I have asked my friends about how much it cost to get into the MET. I always receive different answers. Some people think we have to pay, others believe we don’t since it is a suggested price. After looking over this article and looking into it myself, it became clear that the MET is free. I definitely think the MET should be be more transparent with its prices as Aishwarya has stated, but at the same time it is not realistic.
If the MET decides to remove prices or change their wording to make it clear that the MET is free then less people would donate. The MET’s revenue would decrease substantially, which may affect the amount of art pieces it will be able to house. This is a alarming issue because the question then comes up, do people want a free museum or do they want more art? I don’t agree with the methods the MET uses to bring in extra revenue, but I believe it is a necessary deception.
I do agree with your opinions on the issue of pricing for the metropolitan museum. I also believe that the MET museum could be more clear with their standard for pricing. The first time I ever went to the museum I paid the “full” price stated on the board. Later on, after finding out that these costs are merely recommended, I felt quite depressed for “wasting” money. However, I soon realized that I was just as likely to pay the “full” price even if I knew that the price was only recommended. I mean even if I knew that paying a penny to the museum would be enough, I would feel too shamed to do so.
I actually went to the MET last week for my Art History class and I know exactly what you mean with the MET’s unclear pricing when I looked at the pricing board. While their pricing display is confusing, I highly doubt that the MET is trying to deceive its visitors. It does state recommended fees on the pricing board and it is there so the museum can get some money from people that admire art and want to help support the museum. However, I can clearly see how so many people are getting confused and pay by accident. This is because we are all so used to mandatory fees that as soon as we see a dollar sign with a bunch of numbers next to it, we automatically think that that is the price we have to pay. Many people who do not often go to museums wouldn’t even know that the words “recommended” and “fees” could go together.
On the other hand, I think the Internet deals of MET tickets are actually meant to be deceptive. The people selling these “discounted” tickets on sites like Groupon most likely knows that the MET’s fee is optional and yet they are trying to make it seem like its not which adds to the confusion of the general public. Overall, it’s very sad to see that the MET is getting sued when they didn’t intentionally deceive people into paying the optional fees. I don’t think it’s the MET’s fault; I think people should pay more attention and ask the cashier what the pricing is if they are confused. Besides, paying $25 to see so many great works of art isn’t even a bad deal!