Who should assume the risk when art gets controversial - the artist or their employer?
This article explores the ethical and legal responsibilities of arts organizations when managing controversial works created by artists. It examines the governance structures of Australian arts institutions and the tension between artistic freedom and institutional risk.
Why it matters
It highlights the complex intersection of corporate governance, artistic expression, and public accountability in the cultural sector.
Jay Kogler/AAP Who should assume the risk when art gets controversial – the artist or their employer? Published: August 31, 2026 10:00pm EDT https://theconversation.com/who-should-assume-the-risk-when-art-gets-controversial-the-artist-or-their-employer-289492 https://theconversation.com/who-should-assume-the-risk-when-art-gets-controversial-the-artist-or-their-employer-289492 Link copied Share article Share article
Copy link Email Bluesky Facebook WhatsApp Messenger LinkedIn X (Twitter) Print article
How we value the arts comes down to much more than looking at the sector’s economic contributions. There are also the social benefits , and the importance of connection to culture on a societal level.
Importantly, we need to value art in all its forms – even when it’s confronting or politically risky. When artists take risks, they add value to society. They may express deeply felt convictions, or progress public discourse by challenging common beliefs.
But taking risks means being left exposed. The question then is: to what extent are arts organisation responsible for protecting artists?
Australian organisations operate in three sectors with distinct governance obligations.
Get smarter about the news
Sign up free for a feed built around what you actually care about, Dive Deeper research on any story, and the full text of every article.
Create free accountAlready have an account? Sign in