V&A Museum Censored Catalogues Following Demands by Chinese Printer
The Victoria and Albert Museum (V&A) in London admitted to removing maps and images from at least two exhibition catalogues after demands from its Chinese printing partner. Documents obtained via freedom of information requests reveal that the museum complied with censorship requirements imposed by Beijing, which deemed certain historical content sensitive. Removed items included a 1930s map of British Empire trade routes intended for a catalogue on Black music in Britain, as well as an image of Lenin and another map for a Fabergé exhibition. Although V&A staff expressed frustration and confusion over the restrictions, noting that the censored historical materials had little relevance to contemporary Chinese politics, they proceeded with the edits to avoid costly delays and reprinting in Europe. The museum defended its actions by characterizing the changes as minor and stating that they did not alter the overall narrative of the publications. This incident highlights the broader dilemma faced by UK cultural institutions like the British Museum and Tate, which often utilize Chinese printers for cost efficiency but must consequently navigate strict Chinese censorship laws regarding topics such as Tibet, Taiwan, and political dissent.
Wire timeline
V&A Museum Censored Catalogues Following Demands by Chinese Printer
The Victoria and Albert Museum (V&A) in London admitted to removing maps and images from at least two exhibition catalogues after demands from its Chinese printing partner. Documents obtained via freedom of information requests reveal that the museum complied with censorship requirements imposed by Beijing, which deemed certain historical content sensitive. Removed items included a 1930s map of British Empire trade routes intended for a catalogue on Black music in Britain, as well as an image of Lenin and another map for a Fabergé exhibition. Although V&A staff expressed frustration and confusion over the restrictions, noting that the censored historical materials had little relevance to contemporary Chinese politics, they proceeded with the edits to avoid costly delays and reprinting in Europe. The museum defended its actions by characterizing the changes as minor and stating that they did not alter the overall narrative of the publications. This incident highlights the broader dilemma faced by UK cultural institutions like the British Museum and Tate, which often utilize Chinese printers for cost efficiency but must consequently navigate strict Chinese censorship laws regarding topics such as Tibet, Taiwan, and political dissent.
The Guardian