The Met Gala’s Money Problem: Who Gets to Write the Checks?

The Metropolitan Museum of Art’s Costume Institute exhibition is a highly anticipated event in the fashion world, but it has also become embroiled in controversy and financial risk for its organizers. Last year’s backlash over Amazon’s sponsorship role at the Met Gala was significant, with critics accusing Anna Wintour of courting tech billionaires who prioritize profits over people.

The fallout from that decision included anti-tech activists protesting outside the event and handing out mock urine bottles to decry Amazon’s labor practices. In response, Wintour has apparently changed her approach for the 2027 Gala, introducing a tighter guest list, less ostentation, and a clearer theme.

However, by choosing John Galliano as the subject of next year’s Costume Institute exhibition, Wintour has opted to court controversy from a different direction. The former Dior designer’s 2011 antisemitic tirade is well-documented, but his subsequent attempts to rehabilitate himself through public apologies and a 2024 documentary are unlikely to quell critics.

Wintour’s decision to choose Galliano raises questions about her priorities: is she more concerned with attracting big-name sponsors or creating an exhibition that truly resonates with the fashion community? What does it say about her relationship with powerful donors when she’s willing to overlook Galliano’s past behavior in order to secure their patronage?

Wintour’s decision not to invite Jeff Bezos and his wife Lauren back as major patrons is a welcome development. However, by choosing to court other billionaires – including the Clooneys, Netflix co-CEO Ted Sarandos, and former U.S. ambassador Nicole Avant – Wintour may be trading one set of problems for another.

The Met Gala’s reliance on luxury brands and A-list donors has become increasingly problematic in an era where these companies are often at odds with labor rights and social justice. Wintour’s gestures towards inclusivity, such as introducing more diverse exhibitions and showcasing up-and-coming designers, have been overshadowed by her prioritization of patronage over people.

In the long term, this approach raises questions about Wintour’s commitment to creating a truly democratic institution. As luxury brands continue to prioritize profits over people, it’s worth asking whether the Met Gala is still deserving of its place in the fashion world.

Wintour’s decision not to invite Bezos back as a major patron highlights the limitations of relying on individual billionaires to bankroll cultural institutions. In an era of growing income inequality and systemic injustice, perhaps it’s time for Wintour to rethink her priorities and find alternative ways to fund the Met Gala.

The Met Gala’s future is far from clear-cut – but one thing is certain: its continued reliance on luxury brands and A-list donors will only exacerbate the problems that have come to define this event.