11.1 Privacy, Copyright, Source Criticism & Digital Ethics

Why digital judgement matters

Digital services make appointments, applications and communication easier, but using a screen does not remove ordinary responsibilities to other people. The social studies curriculum explicitly includes privacy, copyright, source criticism and ethical awareness. Knowing where to click is only part of digital competence: you also need to judge what information deserves trust and what you are entitled to share.

Personal information and private life

Personal data is information linked to an identifiable person. A name, an identifiable photograph or a combination of details can identify someone. Health information, financial difficulties and family circumstances can be particularly sensitive. Information does not become harmless merely because it is accurate or already known by a few people.

Privacy concerns a person's ability to maintain a private life and exercise rights over information about them. In everyday life, ask whether sharing is necessary, who will receive the information and whether you have a lawful basis or permission. A public service can sometimes process information because legislation authorises it; consent is not the only legal basis for every organisation. An individual posting a neighbour's personal details should not infer permission from a public body's powers.

Suppose a parent sees another child's medical information in a school group chat. Forwarding it to more parents can deepen the privacy breach. Avoid further circulation, alert the appropriate school contact and consider the child's interests. Helping does not require publicising the family's circumstances.

Photographs and copyright

Two different rights can apply to one photograph:

Copyright protects original creative work, including many texts, photographs and music. Finding an image through a search engine does not make it free to republish. Crediting its creator is not a substitute for obtaining rights where permission is required. Read the licence and its conditions, such as attribution, editing or commercial-use restrictions. A link to the original can be more appropriate than copying the entire work.

For example, a club volunteer finds a sports photograph for an event poster. The volunteer should check the photographer's reuse terms and the depicted people’s interests. Permission from the club to organise the event does not automatically settle either issue. For pictures of children, involve the appropriate guardians and respect the child's views; a teacher cannot simply consent on behalf of every family.

Assessing a claim

Source criticism means evaluating information, rather than automatically accepting or rejecting it. A familiar person can repeat an inaccurate claim in good faith. An official page can be old or apply to a different situation. A confident tone, many shares or a professional-looking logo is not evidence that a claim is correct.

Use this sequence with a practical question:

1. Identify the exact claim and what decision depends on it.
2. Find the original source, rather than relying on a screenshot or quotation.
3. Check the publication or update date and any effective date.
4. Ask whether the rule applies to this test, permit, age group or place.
5. Compare credible evidence and ask the responsible authority if the conflict remains.

A fictional learner finds two statements about whether a residence application requires course attendance. One is an older forum post; the other is a dated UDI announcement describing a rule change. The learner should compare the dates and application conditions. The correct response is not that every forum statement is false, but that an immigration decision needs the applicable authority’s current rule.

Security and helping others

Electronic identification, including BankID, is personal. Keep passwords and approval codes private. A person pretending to help can use an approval to sign a loan or access information. If a message demands immediate action, go independently to the known official service instead of trusting a link or caller identity.

Helping an older relative does not justify impersonating them. Use the agency's supported authorisation or delegation process, and disclose only the information necessary for the task. Explain what action will be taken and check that the person understands. Where digital access is difficult, ask the public agency about assistance or alternative channels.

Ethical awareness and democratic discussion

Ethical awareness involves considering consequences and competing interests. A club may want to promote an event, while a participant needs privacy. A family may value convenience, while a digital-only process excludes someone with limited access. Consider a less intrusive option, such as a photograph without identifiable faces or an assisted application appointment.

In political discussion, distinguish a fact claim from a value judgement. People can disagree about the best policy even when they agree on the figures. Criticise arguments without threats or exposing private information. Correcting a shared error is responsible participation, not a loss of face. A useful self-check is whether you could explain your source and your choice respectfully to someone affected by it.

Remember

• Personal data identifies or can identify a person; health, family and financial information need particular care.
• Permission to publish someone’s photograph and permission to reuse the photographer’s work are separate questions.
• Evaluate a claim’s source, date, purpose, evidence and applicability before acting on it or sharing it.

Official sources

Checked 18 October 2026: Official digital judgement lesson; Datatilsynet: children and privacy; Government: copyright.