Hello there, I'm Ed Butler and welcome to Business Daily from the BBC.

In today's programme, we're asking, should the arts be setting a high moral standard

when it comes to the business sponsors that they accept?

Yes, arts organisations do need money, but they also need to protect themselves from risks to their reputation.

And that means having a robust ethical funding policy that says, OK, where are our red lines?

So should those red lines be excluding drugs companies, for example, polluting oil firms?

Are philanthropists just giving to cleanse their stained

reputations? Most people practice what I would call patronage philanthropy, which is very much about

being very generous with their checkbooks, but really not understanding deeply about issues.

That's all to come in Business Daily from the BBC.

So is the arts becoming a new front line in a public relations war over greed and corporate misdeeds.

400,000 deaths. 400,000 deaths. misdeeds. That's the sound of protests at the Guggenheim Museum in New York back in February

during an exhibition by the photographer Nan Golding.

The 400,000 they're shouting about, are the estimated number thought to have died in the US

after becoming addicted to a prescription drug oxycontin. Oxicontin was produced by purgy

pharma and that firm is allegedly linked to the very wealthy Sackler Trust, which sponsors the

Guggenheim Museum. Nan Golding herself, as it happens, is a former Oxycontin addict.

Well, the Sackler Trust denies any direct connection to the drug,

but the protests have had an effect.

The Guggenheim says it now no longer is taking Sackler donations,

nor, in fact, is the Tate Gallery in London.

The British novelist, art critic and broadcaster

...