I disagree with Christopher Whittle's suggestion that an increase in the
popularity of museums would lead to an increase in museum salaries.
 Increased attendance COULD help justify REQUESTS for increases in salaries,
but there isn't necessarily any direct correlation, nor are there any
guarantees.  The fact is that many major museums are enormously "popular" and
accommodate great hordes of people: if anyone has the statistics to prove
that salaries at those institutions are automatically higher than salaries at
less "popular" museums, I'd love to see them.  Call me an elitist or some
sort of purist, but the notion that we should try to attract higher
attendance by doing what is "popular" in order to increase our salaries
bothers me.  As everyone knows, the ways in which most museums are funded are
complex.  If you have substantial admission fees, obviously increased
attendance can provide the funds and incentive to raise salaries, but it's
not a sure thing.

If you do build a highly enthused museum-going public, I wouldn't hold my
breath waiting for them to call their politicians, out of gratitude, to
request increased funding.  The only reason most people would be willing to
do that would be in the hope of lowering admission fees, and they certainly
don't want to do anything that might increase their taxes.  As others have
already said, the way to get higher salaries across the board is to lobby for
it.  Do baseball players get obscene compensation because the fans request
it?  I don't think so.

--David Haberstich