Source: European Parliament
Question for written answer E-002478/2025
to the Commission
Rule 144
Lefteris Nikolaou-Alavanos (NI)
The recent use of the Acropolis by a sports company for advertisement purposes constitutes another outrageous expression of the commercialisation of cultural heritage.
This is not the first time that archaeological sites have been exploited by business groups – there have been dozens of examples already. In fact, a few days later, there was another instance in the Old Palace of Corfu.
This practice is the result of an EU policy that has been implemented over time by successive governments, including the current Nea Dimokratia Government.
With the ‘Creative Europe’ programme, the EU aims to enable the cultural and creative sectors to ‘expand their entrepreneurial potential’ in the context of the European single market, ‘recognising the economic value of these sectors, including their wider contribution to growth and competitiveness’.
This approach based on the commercialisation of cultural heritage is accompanied by the minimisation of state funding for the protection and promotion of cultural heritage and by the pursuit of private sources of revenue, as well as the capitalisation of cultural heritage to boost the profits of other sectors of the economy.
How does the Commission view the fact that, on the basis of its approach, which is supported and implemented by national governments, it has transformed cultural heritage sites into an opportunity for profit and competition, commercialising both their content and access to it?
Submitted: 19.6.2025