Let me preface this by saying I too am anti- genAI, anti- mega data centers, etc, etc.
HOWEVER I am a museum professional and am also a member of a lot of the big-name museum organizations in the United States: AAM (American Alliance of Museums), AASLH (American Association for State and Local History), NAI (National Association of Interpretation -- interpretation as in how to tell about a subject, not language interpretation. A lot of park rangers are members of this one), and smaller local ones that I won't name cause I don't want to dox myself.
Just like OP is, a lot of museums (if not every museum) are trying to figure out their AI policy. There is a lot of discourse about this in these associations too. There seems to be a new webinar on the topic of generative AI every other week and lots of panels on this topic at conferences. I was literally in a webinar yesterday where ethics around this was the topic.
I've seen comments and tags on this post saying "I will never visit a museum who uses AI". So instead of going through the arguments of pro or con, I want to discuss the why. Why might a museum resort to generative AI. I'm lucky enough to work at a fairly large museum. But I know plenty of museums that only have 1 official person on staff-- not because they don't want to hire more, but because they literally cannot.
A lot of museums are funded through the local government and have to fight in the legislature to get what they can. The rest they make up for in memberships, donations, IMLS grants, foundation partnerships, etc. These smaller museums? Have you ever gone to one and realized it was free admission or had admission under $5? This is due to that outside funding. Otherwise, they wouldn't be able to continue having a museum serving that community. That one official person? Might not even work there full time due to that lack of funding.
And in order to get the public to keep coming back? They have to come up with changing exhibits while also 1. Running the museum 2. writing those exhibits 3. managing the collection 4. fielding donation requests (y'all tell your uncle to stop trying to donate confederate money to museums. They already probably have 500 copies and are themselves trying to figure out if they can de-accession any of it) 5. Market their museum 6. Build that exhibit. 7. Train volunteer docents who think they know what they're talking about but don't 8. Manage the gift shop 9. Schmooze other organizations and the legislature into giving them money. oh and maybe possibly at some point 10. start digitizing their collection onto software that's older than some of you are.
So yes. Museums, especially smaller ones, are starting to consider using close-sourced, open-sourced, etc and what their policy should be around it. A lot of the consensus I'm seeing is that it should Not be used to write exhibitions. A lot of museums professionals across the board are extremely worried about that happening because of the "hallucinating" and not understanding "nuance".
But they are interested in what can make it easier for them to be able to run their small museum more efficiently on the limited budget and manpower they have. If that is having marketing graphics made by genAI because the person running the museum went to school for history, not graphic design, and can't work with a graphic designer because they don't have the ability to pay for the services of one-- they're gonna seriously consider it.
If that is asking perplexity to find research sources for them to then review and it saved them time to have a list of sources generated instead of digging through databases themselves, they're going to consider utilizing that tool.
Those thousands of donations requests? That can be streamlined through a form to, again, be reviewed and be automatically compiled into a report to be sent to the museum board all via Microsoft's AI program.
Again. I am NOT saying generative AI is a blessing in disguise to the Museum community and will save small museums from extinction.
I am saying that museum professionals are having to make a choice in a political climate where money is not being handed to these cultural institutions to keep their doors open and better serve their local community.
Instead of judging museums for why they might turn to this and saying "I will never visit a museum who uses/markets with AI", tell your city, county, and state legislatures that you want more funding going to museums. Tell them this often. That investment in museums is an investment in the community they serve. This funding could help museums to instead hire the people to fill those roles they couldn't previously afford to hire.
And visit museums often! The number of people who visit museums helps drive local governments into allocating more money their way. This is why I ask you to please, even if a museum does decide to use AI, please don't walk away from museums. They need you.