About Subscribe Submit news Get in touch
 
Home Opinion In depth Video LIVE news Interviews Company profiles Events diary Jobs
Greta Thunberg condemns Science Museum for signing Shell gagging order | Planet Attractions
     

news

Greta Thunberg condemns Science Museum for signing Shell gagging order

Details of the gagging clause were shared by campaign group; Culture Unstained, which described the agreement as ‘problematic’.




Teenage climate activist Greta Thunberg voiced her disapproval of the Science Museum on Twitter   Credit: PA Wire

The Science Museum Group (SMG) has come under fire from environmental activists, including teenage climate activist Greta Thunberg, following reports that the group has signed a ‘gagging clause’ with oil company Shell, over its sponsorship of the Our Future Planet exhibition.

Parts of the contract between SMG and Shell were shared online by Culture Unstained, a research and campaigning organisation that aims to end fossil fuel companies sponsoring culture. The contract seems to show an agreement between the two parties that the SMG are “not to damage the goodwill and reputation” of the oil giant.

According to the contract, the SMG is not to “make any statement or issue any publicity or otherwise be involved in any conduct or matter that may reasonably be foreseen as discrediting or damaging the goodwill or reputation of the sponsor.”

Problematic

Taking to Twitter, Thunberg said: “The ‘Science’ Museum just killed irony (and their own reputation).”

Culture Unstained described the contract as “problematic.”

“The decision by the Science Museum’s management to sign a gagging clause to protect Shell puts other staff in a very difficult position and this should be of great concern to the museum sector as a whole,” the organisation shared on Twitter.

“The official contract with Shell reveals how the museum effectively signed up to a ‘gagging clause’ that prevents it from making ‘any statement’ that could be seen as damaging Shell’s reputation. This clause might be regarded as standard by the SMG but, in this setting, it is hugely problematic.”

Jonathan Newby, acting director and chief executive of the SMG, said: “At all times the Science Museum retains editorial control of the content within our exhibitions and galleries. 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.”

A spokesperson from Shell added: “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 - are essential.”

Ecologist Dr Emma Sayer, who worked on the exhibition, has asked for her name to be removed from the installation, claiming that she’s “embarrassed to be involved” and shocked and disappointed by Shell’s sponsorship. While youth climate protestors have said they don’t want their climate strike placards to be used in the exhibition, which they have deemed as an attempt from Shell to greenwash its image.

Greenwashing

This isn’t the first time the SMG has come under fire for its partnership with Shell. Earlier this year, environmentalists voiced concerns over greenwashing when it was announced that Shell would be sponsoring the Our Future Planet exhibition.

Previously, the company supported the Science Museum’s Atmosphere: Exploring Climate Science exhibition, and had – according to claims made in The Guardian in 2015 – objected to the SMG’s Climate Change programming and tried to influence information included in the exhibition.

“How can it be anything other than a bad move? The only reason fossil fuel companies are keen on link-ups such as this is to give the impression that they are actually bothered by the climate emergency. This is both greenwash and hogwash,” said Bill McGuire, a professor emeritus of geophysical and climate hazards at University College London

“For decades, fossil fuel companies have worked hard to cloud the climate change issue and obfuscate science. Now the facts are known and the urgency of the crisis is clear and present, they are taking the tack that they are concerned about it and that they are actually doing their bit.”

Youth climate activists have called for their placards to be removed from the exhibition, which they see as Shell trying to greenwash its image   CREDIT: PA WIRE


The Our Future Planet exhibition explores cutting-edge technologies being developed to slow the effects of climate change   CREDIT: SCIENCE MUSEUM GROUP



Museums and galleries

 

Disney agrees settlement with DeSantis backed board over Florida governance dispute





Merlin makes major acquisition of The Wheel at Icon Park





Saudi Arabia lands latest major IP with announcement of world-first Dragon Ball theme park




Industry insights



Spatial Sound, Immersive Audio: What is it and is it here to stay?



Video



WATCH: Steve Drake on accesso’s expanding portfolio


In Depth



Mundo Amazonia: Exploring Bellewaerde Park’s new themed area for 2024



© Kazoo 5 Limited 2024
About Subscribe Get in touch
 
Opinion In depth Interviews
LIVE news Profiles Diary Video
Jobs
Greta Thunberg condemns Science Museum for signing Shell gagging order | Planet Attractions
news

Greta Thunberg condemns Science Museum for signing Shell gagging order

Details of the gagging clause were shared by campaign group; Culture Unstained, which described the agreement as ‘problematic’.




Teenage climate activist Greta Thunberg voiced her disapproval of the Science Museum on Twitter   Credit: PA Wire

The Science Museum Group (SMG) has come under fire from environmental activists, including teenage climate activist Greta Thunberg, following reports that the group has signed a ‘gagging clause’ with oil company Shell, over its sponsorship of the Our Future Planet exhibition.

Parts of the contract between SMG and Shell were shared online by Culture Unstained, a research and campaigning organisation that aims to end fossil fuel companies sponsoring culture. The contract seems to show an agreement between the two parties that the SMG are “not to damage the goodwill and reputation” of the oil giant.

According to the contract, the SMG is not to “make any statement or issue any publicity or otherwise be involved in any conduct or matter that may reasonably be foreseen as discrediting or damaging the goodwill or reputation of the sponsor.”

Problematic

Taking to Twitter, Thunberg said: “The ‘Science’ Museum just killed irony (and their own reputation).”

Culture Unstained described the contract as “problematic.”

“The decision by the Science Museum’s management to sign a gagging clause to protect Shell puts other staff in a very difficult position and this should be of great concern to the museum sector as a whole,” the organisation shared on Twitter.

“The official contract with Shell reveals how the museum effectively signed up to a ‘gagging clause’ that prevents it from making ‘any statement’ that could be seen as damaging Shell’s reputation. This clause might be regarded as standard by the SMG but, in this setting, it is hugely problematic.”

Jonathan Newby, acting director and chief executive of the SMG, said: “At all times the Science Museum retains editorial control of the content within our exhibitions and galleries. 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.”

A spokesperson from Shell added: “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 - are essential.”

Ecologist Dr Emma Sayer, who worked on the exhibition, has asked for her name to be removed from the installation, claiming that she’s “embarrassed to be involved” and shocked and disappointed by Shell’s sponsorship. While youth climate protestors have said they don’t want their climate strike placards to be used in the exhibition, which they have deemed as an attempt from Shell to greenwash its image.

Greenwashing

This isn’t the first time the SMG has come under fire for its partnership with Shell. Earlier this year, environmentalists voiced concerns over greenwashing when it was announced that Shell would be sponsoring the Our Future Planet exhibition.

Previously, the company supported the Science Museum’s Atmosphere: Exploring Climate Science exhibition, and had – according to claims made in The Guardian in 2015 – objected to the SMG’s Climate Change programming and tried to influence information included in the exhibition.

“How can it be anything other than a bad move? The only reason fossil fuel companies are keen on link-ups such as this is to give the impression that they are actually bothered by the climate emergency. This is both greenwash and hogwash,” said Bill McGuire, a professor emeritus of geophysical and climate hazards at University College London

“For decades, fossil fuel companies have worked hard to cloud the climate change issue and obfuscate science. Now the facts are known and the urgency of the crisis is clear and present, they are taking the tack that they are concerned about it and that they are actually doing their bit.”

Youth climate activists have called for their placards to be removed from the exhibition, which they see as Shell trying to greenwash its image   CREDIT: PA WIRE


The Our Future Planet exhibition explores cutting-edge technologies being developed to slow the effects of climate change   CREDIT: SCIENCE MUSEUM GROUP



 



© Kazoo 5 Limited 2024