Digital Editions
Newsletters
Subscribe
Digital Editions
Newsletters
Art market
Museums & heritage
Exhibitions
Books
Podcasts
Columns
Technology
Adventures with Van Gogh
Art market
Museums & heritage
Exhibitions
Books
Podcasts
Columns
Technology
Adventures with Van Gogh
Museums
news

Greta Thunberg says Science Museum ‘killed its reputation’ after it is revealed Shell sponsorship came with gagging order

Culture Unstained activists say contract clause is ‘chilling’ but museum group says cutting ties with energy groups is ‘unproductive’

Gareth Harris
30 July 2021
Share
Greta Thunberg tweeted last night that "The 'Science' Museum just killed irony (and their own reputation)" over gagging order from Shell Photo: Markus Schweizer

Greta Thunberg tweeted last night that "The 'Science' Museum just killed irony (and their own reputation)" over gagging order from Shell Photo: Markus Schweizer

The Science Museum in London signed a “gagging clause” with Shell preventing museum staff and trustees from criticising the oil company, claims the activist group Culture Unstained. Documents obtained through the Freedom of Information act relate to Shell’s sponsorship of the climate exhibition Our Future Planet, which opened in May.

Culture Unstained claims that “Clause 6.7 of the Sponsorship Agreement prevents the Science Museum Group, and its trustees, from saying or doing anything that could be seen as ‘damaging the goodwill or reputation’ of its sponsor. In effect, it is a form of gagging clause.” The sponsorship fee is redacted in the documents.

Last night the environmental activist Greta Thunberg tweeted that “the ‘Science’ museum just killed irony (and their own reputation)”. The museum also faced a wave of criticism from scientists and environmentalists when the sponsorship deal with the Anglo-Dutch oil group was announced in April. Meanwhile, Emma Sayer, a reader in ecosystem ecology at Lancaster University, told Channel 4 News that she wants her name removed from the exhibition.

The “Science” Museum just killed irony (and their own reputation). https://t.co/95OB7tjI1J

— Greta Thunberg (@GretaThunberg) July 29, 2021

The campaign group adds: “This clause may be regarded as standard and uncontroversial by the Science Museum group and some other organisations but, in this setting, it is highly problematic. It essentially creates a ‘chilling effect’, where museum staff must refrain from speaking openly about the reality of Shell’s activities because it could be seen as damaging the company’s goodwill or reputation.”

Culture Unstained also revealed documentation showing that the Science Museum sought sponsorship for Our Future Planet from the fossil-fuel based Oil and Gas Climate Initiative (OGCI), a consortium of chief executives from oil and gas companies such as Saudi Aramco, ExxonMobil and Shell.

But the museum terminated these discussions. “At the eleventh hour, the Science Museum Group walked away from the proposed sponsorship deal with the OGCI because just one of its twelve member oil and gas companies had fallen short of the museum’s chosen standard for sponsors, the ratings given to them by the Transition Pathway Initiative,” says Culture Unstained.

Jonathan Newby, the acting director and chief executive at the Science Museum Group, says in a statement that that the group is committed to engaging people in the “vital issue” of climate change. “Energy companies need to play a big part in that change and we regard the blanket approach demanded by some campaigners of severing all relationships with energy companies as unproductive,” he adds.

At all times the Science Museum retains editorial control of the content in its exhibitions and galleries, Newby says. “We entirely reject the unsubstantiated claim that our curators were in any way inhibited in carrying out their vital role in an expert, independent and thorough manner,” he adds. The Art Newspaper understands that the sponsorship agreement in question with Shell was entered into after content work on Our Future Planet was concluded.

A Shell spokesperson told Channel 4 news: “We fully respect the museum’s independence. That’s why its exhibition on carbon capture matters and why we supported it. Debate and discussion, among anyone who sees it [the exhibition], are essential.”

MuseumsMuseums & HeritageScience MuseumClimate change
Share
Subscribe to The Art Newspaper’s digital newsletter for your daily digest of essential news, views and analysis from the international art world delivered directly to your inbox.
Newsletter sign-up
Information
About
Contact
Cookie policy
Data protection
Privacy policy
Frequently Asked Questions
Subscription T&Cs
Terms and conditions
Advertise
Sister Papers
Sponsorship policy
Follow us
Instagram
Bluesky
LinkedIn
Facebook
TikTok
YouTube
© The Art Newspaper

Related content

Sponsorshipnews
20 April 2021

After staunch criticism, Science Museum defends oil company Shell’s sponsorship of its climate exhibition

Director Ian Blatchford says that the Science Museum Group "retains editorial control" over London show

Gareth Harris
Museums & Heritagenews
1 March 2023

Critics line up to condemn Science Museum’s sponsorship deal with Adani Green Energy

Museum is accused of “reprehensible” behaviour in allegedly allowing crisis-hit parent company Adani to greenwash its huge fossil fuel business

Joe Ware
Climate changenews
4 October 2021

Climate scientist stands down as adviser to London's Science Museum over fossil fuel sponsorship

Chris Rapley, a professor of climate science at University College London, disagrees with the museum's "ongoing willingness to accept oil and gas company sponsorship"

Gareth Harris