I wonder if you read the article you posted as your source because they clearly state why they will remove the shrunken heads and other pieces from the next exhibition.
It has nothing to do with "Political Correctness"
They remove these pieces from the next exhibition (btw it's completely normal that museums remove and add pieces to an exhibition because they have much more exhibits than they can actually display) because they think these exhibits don't teach the visitor something about the people they are coming from but instead paint those people in a wrong picture.
So their goal is to actually present these people and cultures more accurately than in past exhibitions. Of course we will se if they achieve their goal but to judge that, we would have to a) see the new exhibition and b) be actuall experts on the topic.
So cool down and let to poor old Orwell rest for a bit, he gets used way to often nowadays.
Of course I read it. Your reply is both condescending and off-base, because my source does clearly state why they will remove the shrunken heads -- and it has everything to do with "political correctness."
Yes, museums routinely remove and add pieces to their displays. That has nothing to do with the article which states that the museum "has removed 1230 human remains from its display as part of a museum-wide effort to 'decolonize' the institution" (emphasis added). That's not simply the cycling out of a few pieces, to put up a new display, to freshen up exhibits, or whatever. That's an explicitly political effort. Further, this began with "an ethical review of its artifacts" due to "the derogatory language used in the historic case labels," which I think sits comfortably with what we all understand as political correctness. (So maybe cool it with the obnoxious "spoiler tag" kind of cleverness, and maybe spend that time making sure you've understood what you've read, instead?)
The heads, "one of the museum's most popular attractions since the 1940s," are being removed to soothe the sensibilities of guests who find those remains "a testament to other cultures being ‘savage’, ‘primitive’ or ‘gruesome'," per the museum director, as quoted in the article. She goes on to say, as I'd quoted initially, that "the displays reinforced racist and stereotypical thinking that goes against the Museum’s values today." So that's the point: to combat "racist and stereotypical thinking," because people find the heads "savage," "primitive," and "gruesome," not to "actually present these people and cultures more accurately," as you have represented. (It could be that a culture is presented completely "accurately," however that is measured, and yet some people might still judge that culture as "gruesome," or whatever. That's people, you know? Always having opinions.)
Further, the museum has complete control of presentation: so if this were really about simply presenting "these people and cultures more accurately," it could always provide additional information to help visitors understand the artifacts or further contextualize them, with additional displays, pamphlets, lectures, etc. Museums do that all the time; plenty of historical artifacts are strange or upsetting to modern eyes, and require additional information or context to be properly understood. In a way, that's a museum's entire job (vis a vis display) and how they educate and inform. They are choosing instead to hide genuine artifacts from view (one of their most popular attractions, mind), because they do not like how people respond when provided with the actual evidence of earlier cultures.
Not only is it perverse for a museum to hide information from its visitors rather than provide the same (I could as easily have referenced Bradbury as Orwell; it's as backwards as his "fire department"), but it is both insulting and controlling. The visitors cannot be expected to understand what they're seeing. They cannot be allowed to reach their own conclusions.
And speaking of conclusions, how is it you (who questioned whether I'd read the article) managed to read it and present it so dishonestly? Or maybe you are simply so blinded by your political perspective (because anyone who takes aim at "political correctness" must be the enemy, I'm sure) that you cannot see this straight. But yes, when a museum begins removing artifacts from display because the people who view them form "incorrect" opinions, that's a problem. We do not employ museums to hide from us the evidence of the past, but to show it to us.