Changes in museums Nowadays, one of the most tourist attractions in cities is a museum. Not only being accessible to illustrated wealthy people, but also to the general public. This evolution has been possible mainly thanks to new technology. But that change has been a positive or a negative one? Both texts argue about this question supported by diverse arguments. The first text outlines that museums are a new spare time activity to society. For that reason, these entities have taken advantage of new technologies to attract more no well-versed people in these topics. Concentrating their evolution in cutting-edge technology, which has helped to make “touchable” the knowledge. Giving the fact that knowledge is the core of a well-being society; I personally believe that that approach to ordinary people is vital to build a better community. The second text considers that museums have evolved for the worst. This text exposes that due to the fact that museums have essentially focused on the display of collections rather than in knowledge, the information has been blurred for attendants. In that way, this author expresses that museums have facilitated this involution instead of catering for knowledge. The way as I see it is that although it is correct that level of information facilitated for museums has decreased in quality, it is worth changing the tune for making them more accessible to whole citizenship. All in all, close institutions are the first step to accessibility to people. Nevertheless, museums should be a source of knowledge. For those reasons, I think that keeping the balance between them is the clue.