When you allow galleries or exhibition halls to be named after
a sponsor are they entitled to some form of plaque, message
alongside within your institutions?

I am wondering how Harry Needham rates this example in the ethical
case studies?

Here I recently researched RTZ Plc (Rio Tinto Zinc) the mining
coporation.  They are regarded as a environmental anathema, they are
involved in Indonesia (and thus accused by certain British press of
supporting the regime).  Yet they are the stlgSterling 1 million
sponsors of the new Earth Galleries at the Natural History Museum,
London, England.  Here they have the first gallery named as 'The RTZ
Atrium' with stiring passage from the chairman Sir Derek Birkin
stating how they care about the environment!!!  Surely this is
unethical.  This company has a poor reputation for environmental
consideration yet they have been given the opportunity to state
otherwise by the Museum - for a generous amount of money.   RTZ has
had no other input, there are no mentions later, no logo placements.

I would argue that the very act of the NHMuseum in accetpting the
money and allowing RTZ to cleanse its name is an unethical act by the
museum - What do you think?

Graham
MA Museum Studies
Leiciester University
Britain