Museums are often seen as a type of "conservative" institution. This may be due to the fact that most of the items it collects are 'old'. But in reality, museums cannot remain unchanged in society. In the book "Museums in a Diverse World," it is mentioned that museums are no longer isolated in the various waves of contemporary society. Among them, marketization is one of the important waves. Recently, some museums in China have launched immersive experience activities, breaking people's stereotypes of traditional museums. For example, according to media reports, four well-known museums in Luoyang have launched a night stay program for historical and cultural museums, which has attracted the attention of many enthusiasts. However, the price for one night has exceeded a thousand yuan, which has sparked a lot of discussion. So, is this an innovation, or is it a blind obedience or compromise of museums in the face of the wave of marketization? Similar controversies have occurred more than once in the field of museums. In the face of such controversy, we first need to understand from a theoretical perspective why museums are constantly controversial when they enter the market. This is closely related to the two positions that museums shoulder: one is public cultural service institutions, and the other is non-profit institutions. The so-called public cultural service institutions have a strong value intention of serving everyone, and entering them in a low threshold way is the basic public perception of such institutions. Regarding non-profit institutions, there is a value orientation that is not aimed at profit. The International Association of Museums has repeatedly revised the definition of the term "museum", and many modifying words have been repeatedly modified. However, in several revisions in recent years, the term "non-profit organization" has been retained as the positioning of "museum". It can be seen that the international academic community attaches great importance to this issue. But does this mean that museums must be insulated from the market? This viewpoint is still outdated. Researchers have proposed over 20 years ago that blindly pursuing museums to serve everyone is unrealistic and inefficient. Museums should have more strategic ways to achieve their positioning. As for the issue of "non-profit", it has long been recognized in the academic community that this is a purposeful approach, which does not mean that museums cannot participate in all profit-making activities. In terms of specific means, many countries determine whether museums belong to non-profit organizations based on whether the revenue from museum profits serves public purposes, rather than cutting off all market revenue. So, the next question is, under the wave of marketization, what innovation and behavior are the most appropriate for museums today? And the answer to this question may still need to return to the question of what "conservative" museums are actually "conservative". One of the sticking points of museums is their public nature in terms of target positioning, which is also emphasized when mentioning public cultural service institutions and non-profit organizations. In this dimension, museums are not unable to host or participate in high priced market activities, but rather need to constantly prove to themselves and the outside world that such activities are in line with their public attributes in terms of purpose. The content and income generated from such activities can contribute to more public goals such as public welfare, social justice, and cultural development. The second sticking point of museums lies in their resource level objects（