<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
	xmlns:georss="http://www.georss.org/georss" xmlns:geo="http://www.w3.org/2003/01/geo/wgs84_pos#" xmlns:media="http://search.yahoo.com/mrss/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: More about MoMA and Money</title>
	<atom:link href="http://lookingaround.blogs.time.com/2007/02/26/more_about_moma_and_money/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://lookingaround.blogs.time.com/2007/02/26/more_about_moma_and_money/</link>
	<description>Reflections on art and architecture by TIME critic Richard Lacayo.</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Tue, 08 Dec 2009 15:49:09 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<generator>http://wordpress.com/</generator>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
		<item>
		<title>By: anonymous</title>
		<link>http://lookingaround.blogs.time.com/2007/02/26/more_about_moma_and_money/comment-page-1/#comment-27</link>
		<dc:creator>anonymous</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 27 Feb 2007 14:10:54 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://lookingaround.blogs.time.com/2007/02/26/more_about_moma_and_money/#comment-27</guid>
		<description>Lowry&#039;s response to Rosenbaum missed the mark. Obviously, a trustee committee that must approve exhibitions or gifts is not a safeguard against the kinds of conflicts of interest she was referring to: those committees are made up of the very trustees she is talking about. Rockefeller, Gund, and Lauder are the powerbrockers of MoMA, and it is perfectly reasonable to assume that their approach to managing Lowry (through secret payments and other means) is as tied in to their activities as private collectors as it is to their philanthropic activities on behalf of the museum. These payments also reinforce their superior power on the board; the run-of-the-mill trustee, who didn&#039;t make a direct payment to Lowry (or even know about it), is thus shut out of any meaningful decision making.
</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Lowry's response to Rosenbaum missed the mark. Obviously, a trustee committee that must approve exhibitions or gifts is not a safeguard against the kinds of conflicts of interest she was referring to: those committees are made up of the very trustees she is talking about. Rockefeller, Gund, and Lauder are the powerbrockers of MoMA, and it is perfectly reasonable to assume that their approach to managing Lowry (through secret payments and other means) is as tied in to their activities as private collectors as it is to their philanthropic activities on behalf of the museum. These payments also reinforce their superior power on the board; the run-of-the-mill trustee, who didn't make a direct payment to Lowry (or even know about it), is thus shut out of any meaningful decision making.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Lee Rosenbaum aka CultureGrrl</title>
		<link>http://lookingaround.blogs.time.com/2007/02/26/more_about_moma_and_money/comment-page-1/#comment-26</link>
		<dc:creator>Lee Rosenbaum aka CultureGrrl</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 27 Feb 2007 01:22:06 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://lookingaround.blogs.time.com/2007/02/26/more_about_moma_and_money/#comment-26</guid>
		<description>A point of clarification: My question to Glenn Lowry and the rest of ADAA&#039;s museum-director panel did not specify the kinds of conflict of interest that might have been created by the trustees who supplemented his compensation through a private foundation. It was Lowry, not I, who chose to limit the discussion to acquisition decisions. As you rightly observe, there are many other areas of potential conflict. I intend to elaborate on this in a future post on the &quot;CultureGrrl&quot; blog that you cited today. Lee Rosenbaum aka CultureGrrl
</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>A point of clarification: My question to Glenn Lowry and the rest of ADAA's museum-director panel did not specify the kinds of conflict of interest that might have been created by the trustees who supplemented his compensation through a private foundation. It was Lowry, not I, who chose to limit the discussion to acquisition decisions. As you rightly observe, there are many other areas of potential conflict. I intend to elaborate on this in a future post on the "CultureGrrl" blog that you cited today. Lee Rosenbaum aka CultureGrrl</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>
