{{img:img_ethics_debate_concept}}
Today the class takes a stand on one digital ethics question. You leave with an Ethics Debate Note for your investigation folder: both sides, then your own view with evidence.
Think of one digital action people argue about (music downloading, using an image without credit, AI writing a CV draft, a deepfake of a public figure). Without writing anything down: which side would you defend first, and what single fact would you use?
Before you put markers on the opinion line, get these four ideas straight. Without them the debate turns into shouting; with them you leave with a note you can actually defend.
| Concept | Why it matters | Example |
|---|---|---|
| Reasoned position — a clear stance you can explain, not just a gut feeling | Interview panels and coursework care how you argue, not only which side you pick | "I oppose unpaid scraping of Irish musicians' tracks for AI training because creators lose control of reuse" |
| Evidence — a fact, law, licence, or real case that supports the claim | Without evidence, a debate is opinion theatre; with it, your note is usable coursework | Naming the Copyright and Related Rights Act 2000, a Creative Commons term, or a public case about uncredited images |
| Fair summary — stating both main positions accurately before your own view | Later write-ups about your own project work need balance; twisting the other side into something silly weakens your own case | Write Position A and Position B in neutral language first, then "My view" with evidence |
| Digital rights flashpoints — creative rights, AI training on scraped data, and deepfakes (synthetic media of real people) | These are the live topics your class may choose; each asks who controls media and what reuse is fair | Wikimedia photo with licence named vs GAA club Instagram shot lifted with no credit; AI style-copy of a living illustrator; fake clip of a local councillor "endorsing" a product |
Your portfolio page should match these four blocks (demo topic only; your class will choose the real question):
1. Debate topic
Should AI companies be allowed to train image models on artists' work posted online without asking each artist?
2. Position A
Yes, if the output is new. Training is like learning from examples; banning it freezes useful tools. Evidence often cited: scale of public web data; innovation for small businesses.
3. Position B
No without consent or licence. Artists lose income and control; "publicly visible" is not "free to train on". Evidence often cited: copyright; creator contracts; style-copy harm.
4. My reasoned view
I side with B for commercial training, but allow clearly licensed or public-domain sets. Evidence: Creative Commons terms from earlier work on this course; the habit of saying openly where AI helped, which your own project pieces already ask for.
You will write your own version after the class debate, using the exact question on the board.
Place your marker on each statement. There is no scored "right" answer. The point is to hear both sides, move if the evidence changes your mind, and help the class choose one question for the written Ethics Debate Note.
After the markers settle on the second statement, the class agrees one debate question. Everyone uses that exact board wording in {{code:sm4_ethics_debate_note}}.
Use this table if you stall while writing. Your teacher will also keep a short evidence bank on the board so everyone has at least one solid source to cite.
| Issue | Solution |
|---|---|
| I only have a feeling, not a position | Finish this sentence: "I believe X because…" The "because" must name a fact, law, licence, or real case. If you cannot finish it, you are not ready to place a strong marker yet. |
| I cannot think of evidence | Use the board evidence bank, or reuse what you already built in SM4: a reference from {{code:sm4_references}}, a Creative Commons licence term, a rights-audit note, or a bias example. One solid source beats three vague slogans. |
| I keep straw-manning the other side | Write Position A and Position B in neutral words a supporter of each side would accept. Only then write "My view". If the other side would say "that is not what we mean", rewrite. |
| The class topic feels too wide | Ask the teacher to narrow the board question to a clear yes/no or allow/ban frame (for example "Should commercial AI image tools train on living artists' work without a licence?"). |
| I changed my mind mid-debate and feel stuck | That is allowed and useful. In your note, say what you believed first, what evidence moved you, and where you stand now. Changing position with reasons is stronger than fake certainty. |
You're previewing this lesson. Get full access to this lesson and hundreds more — each one ready to teach, with interactive activities, printable resources and pupil progress tracking built in.