R.B. Wilkins wrote:
>
> >
> > It suggests to the museum that if, in the future,
> > they contemplate other controversial exhibitions they might suffer the
> > consequence of diminished financial support.  Yeah, its their right, but
> > this warning exerts a powerful influence and, if multiplied unchecked by
> > hundreds of corporations and museums in similar relationships, undermines
> > the free flow of ideas through our institutions to the people.
>
> I don't know how the real world of funding works with museums but it seems
> to me that once Dial hands over whatever funding they give, the use
> should be up to the museums discretion (concerning ethical museum
> guidelines). If the Dial Corp has any concern that they do not want
> support "controversial" exhibitions, then why would they choose to fund the
> museum?

Some of the comments regarding Dial reminded me of a favorite quote:

"Ethics is the art of recommending to others the sacrifices required for
cooperation with oneself"   -Bertrand Russell

Does anyone out there have an E-mail for a contact person at Dial? It
seems that some pretty severe judgments are being passed on this company
without giving them a chance to repond. It's beginning to sound more
like a "lynching" than an intelligent discussion about a very serious
issue...one that could have real impact on Dial's funding of other
institutions and programs.

This is not theoretical...these are real jobs, real families and people
that have to go home and explain to their spouse and kids that they lost
their job at the Museum because Dial pulled out of funding a new
project. Why? Because they were afraid of negative press.

Imagine the possible boycott from the other side of the tracks! I can
see the headlines now: DIAL SUPPORTS FLAG DESECRATION!

Don't get me wrong, I'm not supporting their action in the least, but
it would certainly be interesting (and fair) to have their input. Things
are never as black and white as they seem.

Greg Stemm