Nowadays, some people claim that public museums and art galleries will not be needed because people can see historical objects and works by using computers. Do you agree or disagree?

All around the world, museums and

art

galleries have always played a very important role in educating people. While some people believe these places are no longer needed due to the availability of historical

information

on computers, I completely disagree with

this

statement.

Although

advancement of

information

technology has made data readily available to the public, I believe it cannot provide the full experience of being in a museum or in an

art

gallery.

For instance

, it is near to impossible to explain our historical values to our children if they have not seen any object or artefact in real life, because they will not be able to relate to any physical object which can make them realise its existence in real life despite seeing images on a computer screen.

In addition

, museums and

art

galleries have always been places for tourist attraction and computer technology has played a positive role in marketing these places. Viewing historical objects and artefacts on a computer screen makes it more desirable to visit the place and observe

such

items in close proximity.

For example

, tourists visiting Sydney usually visit New South Wales

Art

Gallery because they usually have already seen the related

information

on the internet and they want a hands on experience. In conclusion, I believe, despite the fact that

information

is readily available on the internet, it does not impact the importance and status of museums and

art

galleries and

such

places will continue to operate, whereas I believe

information

has worked as a marketing medium for these places.