Lesson Report:
**Title: Speculative Futures of AI and Democracy – Introducing the Final Narrative Project**
In this session, students were guided to imagine near-future scenarios (around 2035) in which AI, data collection, and democratic institutions intertwine in everyday life. The instructor used a detailed “smart fridge and health insurance� thought experiment to illustrate how emerging technologies can have both empowering and harmful effects, then pivoted to introducing the final “speculative narrative� assignment. The remainder of class was devoted to structured brainstorming based on students’ earlier policy memos, and to framing their ideas in terms of utopian vs. dystopian futures.
—
## Attendance
– Number of students explicitly mentioned as absent: **0**
– Notes:
– At least one student (Elijah) joined partway through and was greeted as they arrived.
– No formal roll call or explicit absence list was given in the transcript.
—
## Topics Covered (Chronological, with Activity/Lecture Labels)
### 1. Course Timeline and Framing the End of the Semester
– The instructor opened by reminding students:
– There are only **two weeks of classes left**: this week (today and Thursday) and next week.
– After that, the class is finished.
– This framing prepared students for:
– How the course will “endâ€� conceptually.
– What major tasks/assignments remain (especially the final assignment).
—
### 2. Cold Open Thought Experiment: Waking Up in 2035
**Activity: Imaginative Scenario Setup**
– Students were asked to imagine:
– They went to bed “todayâ€� and woke up not tomorrow, but in the **year 2035**.
– They have been in a **coma for 10 years**, but wake up now completely healthy.
– They reunite with their family and gradually settle back into everyday life.
**Introduction of the “Smart Fridge�**
– In this imagined 2035 home, they notice the family has a **smart fridge**.
– The instructor paused the narrative to probe prior knowledge:
– Question: *What is a smart fridge, and how does it differ from a normal refrigerator? What extra functions might it have?*
– Student contributions:
– It can talk to you and provide information (temperature, what products are inside, etc.).
– It can:
– Show what food items are inside.
– Track how much of each product is left.
– Track expiry dates and freshness.
– Suggest recipes and what to cook based on available ingredients.
– Potentially order products automatically (e.g., detecting low milk and ordering via Yandex or comparable service).
– Instructor synthesis:
– A smart fridge is **internet-connected**, can “understandâ€� (via sensors/AI) what is in it, and:
– Answer queries like “How many eggs do we have left?â€� + expiry info.
– Generate shopping lists.
– Potentially place orders automatically.
– They jokingly extended it to a future **“smart fridge + smart oven/air fryerâ€�** ecosystem that could eventually cook for you.
—
### 3. Linking Smart Fridge to Health Insurance: Data, Algorithms, and Risk
**Scenario Escalation: Ice Cream and Insurance Premiums**
– The thought experiment continued:
– The student buys **3–4 containers of ice cream** and puts them in the freezer.
– A family member reacts with alarm: *“Our insurance premiums just went up by 5%!â€�*
– Students were asked to explain:
– What **insurance premiums** are:
– Monthly/annual payments required to maintain insurance coverage.
– Amount changes based on risk-related variables.
– Examples:
– **Car insurance**: premiums often go up after an accident, even if not your fault.
– **Health insurance**: premiums can depend on age, job, health history, etc.
**Key Question to Students**
– The instructor posed the central question:
– *What could be the connection between putting ice cream in the smart fridge and the family’s health insurance premiums going up?*
– Students took 1–2 minutes to write speculative ideas.
**Initial Student Reasoning**
– Students connected:
– Ice cream consumption → possible **health risks** (obesity, heart disease, etc.).
– Insurance companies might infer **unhealthy lifestyle** from frequent high-sugar/fat purchases and thus **raise premiums**.
**Instructor’s Deeper Framing: Algorithms and New Data Sources**
– The instructor clarified:
– Insurance premiums are calculated via **algorithms** that use **data points**:
– Currently: age, employment type (e.g., office vs. construction), number of children, family health history, etc.
– Historically, companies had **limited insight** into individuals’ daily behavior.
– In the 2035 scenario:
– A **new data source** is available: the smart fridge’s continuous monitoring of food purchases and consumption patterns.
– The **insurance company buys data** from the fridge manufacturer/service about what is in the fridge/freezer and possibly how often items are added/removed.
– This extends their algorithm from coarse demographics to **fine-grained lifestyle tracking**.
– Thus:
– Putting multiple containers of ice cream in the freezer is interpreted as a **future health risk signal**, leading the algorithm to **raise the premium**.
**Conceptual Bridge to Course Themes**
– The instructor emphasized:
– This is not far-future science fiction (not “Star Wars levelâ€�), but plausible **5–10 years out** based on:
– Current trends in data collection via IoT devices (smart home, wearables, etc.).
– The evolution of the internet from a space of opinion-sharing to an infrastructure for **continuous surveillance and behavior tracking**.
– The use of **data-driven risk modeling** in **insurance, policing, and facial recognition**.
– This scenario illustrates:
– Dual effects of technology: **convenience** and **harm**.
– The way **surveillance capitalism** and **algorithmic decision-making** can permeate everyday life.
– This thought experiment formed the bridge into the explanation of the **final assignment**.
—
### 4. Introducing the Final Assignment: The Speculative Narrative
**Assignment Overview**
– Assignment name: **“Speculative Narrativeâ€�**
– “Speculativeâ€� = forward-looking, predicting the near future (without claiming certainty).
– “Narrativeâ€� = written as a **story**, not a traditional academic essay.
– Core task:
– **Imagine the year 2035** and write a narrative exploring the **AI–democracy nexus**:
– What has changed in 10 years?
– What remains the same?
– How do course concepts like surveillance capitalism, algorithmic oppression, data governance, etc., show up in everyday life?
**Basic Requirements**
– **Due date:** **December 22**.
– **Length:** **5–8 pages**.
– 5 pages is acceptable; up to 8 pages if needed.
– Not a long-form research paper (e.g., not a 15-page 300-level paper).
– **Sources & Concepts:**
– Use **at least 3 course concepts** (e.g., surveillance capitalism, algorithmic oppression, etc.).
– Use **at least 3 readings from the course**.
– Use **at least 3 external sources** (current research, news, reports, etc.).
– All sources must be **properly cited**.
– **Formality and Style:**
– Should **read like a story**, not a conventional argumentative essay.
– **Third person** is acceptable; no requirement for heavy dialogue.
– Characters are **required** for some templates (e.g., “Day in the Lifeâ€�), optional for others (e.g., “Retrospectiveâ€�).
– Dialogue is **not required**, and students are discouraged from inserting artificial dialogue that simply defines terms (e.g., “As Shoshana Zuboff once stated…â€�).
**Rationale for Narrative Format**
– The instructor:
– Considered assigning a traditional 15-page research paper but rejected it because:
– Such assignments are increasingly easy to outsource to tools like ChatGPT and do not strongly demonstrate **actual understanding**.
– They add a heavy reading load for the instructor without necessarily deepening student learning.
– Wants students to:
– **Synthesize course ideas** in a way that shows how abstract concepts impact **ordinary people**.
– Move beyond **definition and identification** (“this is surveillance capitalismâ€�) toward:
– Depicting how those processes **shape lives, institutions, and crises**.
– Emphasized:
– The assignment should show **human-level consequences** of abstract socio-technical systems.
—
### 5. Narrative Templates for the Final Assignment
Students can choose from three provided templates, or design a different narrative approach if they prefer (as long as the work is original and grounded in course concepts).
#### Template 1: “A Day in the Life�
– Structure:
– Follow a single **character** (the student themselves or another person) through a **significant day** in 2035.
– Requirements:
– The day features an **event** that embodies issues at the AI–democracy intersection.
– Examples given:
– A **journalist** covering a deepfake scandal:
– A video surfaces appearing to show a politician breaking laws or violating norms.
– Uncertainty arises: is it real or a deepfake?
– The journalist must figure out **how to report responsibly** in a media environment saturated with synthetic content.
– Goal:
– Show how course concepts impact **decisions, emotions, and dilemmas** in an everyday but politically salient context.
#### Template 2: “The Crisis Log�
– Structure:
– Tell the story of a **crisis event** using a series of **document fragments** and media artifacts, such as:
– News articles.
– Government memos.
– Presidential speeches.
– Wikipedia entries.
– Internal corporate communications.
– Possible scenario:
– A major **governmental scandal** involving AI-based voter targeting:
– E.g., revelation that an AI system micro-targeted voters with tailored misinformation.
– Goal:
– Show how a crisis **unfolds across institutional documents and media**, and how those documents reflect underlying course concepts.
#### Template 3: “The Retrospective�
– Structure:
– Write as if it is **2050**, and you are summarizing what happened around 2035 in a **textbook-style or Wikipedia-style** entry.
– Focus:
– Explain what happened in 2035 around a chosen AI–democracy event:
– Could be a major policy shift, scandal, regulatory regime, grassroots movement, etc.
– Present this in a neutral, expository tone, but still grounded in course theories.
– Goal:
– Practice **historical/analytical narration** that connects events to broader conceptual frameworks.
#### Flexibility in Style
– Students can depart from these templates if they:
– Use their **own narrative structure** inspired by a novel or other fiction they admire.
– Maintain:
– Originality of plot and language.
– Clear integration of course concepts and sources.
– The instructor explicitly approved:
– Borrowing **narrative style** from an existing work (e.g., a fiction book’s structure), but:
– No copying of plot points or text.
– No reuse of another story’s specific events.
—
### 6. Clarifications about Characters, Dialogue, and Concept Integration
– **Characters:**
– Required for “Day in the Life,â€� optional in “Crisis Logâ€� and “Retrospective.â€�
– Students *may* predict real-world political actors (e.g., who is president) but do not have to.
– **Dialogue:**
– Not required.
– Students should avoid artificial “concept-dumpingâ€� dialogue (e.g., a character quoting Zuboff by name to explain surveillance capitalism).
– Instead, they should:
– Depict **concrete manifestations** of those concepts (e.g., data being silently shared from a smart device to an insurance company).
– **Conceptual Depth:**
– The narrative should:
– Show how AI systems and data practices shape **everyday interactions, governance, and power**.
– Use course readings and theories to **anchor** the imagined future (not just free-floating speculation).
—
### 7. In-Class Brainstorming Activity I: Projecting Policy Memos into 2035
**Setup with Shared Google Doc**
– The instructor shared a **blank Google Doc** and instructed each student to:
– Add a new **tab** labeled with their name.
– Revisit their **policy memos** from the midterm assignment:
– These memos proposed a policy solution to some AI–democracy problem, imagined as implemented in **2025**.
**Writing Task**
– Students were asked to:
– Imagine that their **policy solution was successfully adopted** by the relevant government in 2025.
– Fast-forward to **2035** and describe:
– What has changed in their **country/region/system** because of this policy.
– What is **better**.
– What is **worse**, if applicable.
– How related **technologies** have evolved in response to or enabled by the policy.
– They were asked to:
– Write several sentences (some wrote full paragraphs).
– At the top of their tab, add **one concise sentence** summarizing:
– The **problem** they addressed.
– Their **policy solution**.
**Example Clarification**
– One student asked:
– If their solution involved creating a **database for US elections and labeling**, should they predict:
– Only changes in elections, or also in the overall AI system?
– Instructor’s guidance:
– Consider both:
– Impact on **US elections** (e.g., transparency, integrity, polarization).
– Evolution of the **technical system** itself:
– Has the database remained the same after 10 years?
– Has it expanded in scope or function (e.g., integration with other datasets, new forms of algorithmic use)?
—
### 8. In-Class Brainstorming Activity II: Utopian vs. Dystopian Reflections
**Definitions**
– The instructor introduced/confirmed two key terms:
– **Utopia / Utopian**
– An imagined **perfect or ideal society**.
– Associated with:
– Optimistic views of technology (e.g., AI solving disease, clean energy, equitable prosperity).
– Minimal or no suffering, strong freedoms, social harmony.
– **Dystopia / Dystopian**
– The “oppositeâ€� of utopia: an imagined world marked by:
– **Oppression**, **injustice**, **suffering**.
– Loss of **freedom**, pervasive **surveillance**, authoritarian rule.
– Often extreme inequality and environmental or social collapse.
**Peer Analysis Task**
– Students were instructed to:
– Navigate to the **tab immediately below** their own in the shared Google Doc (or the next tab with content).
– Read that student’s 2035 scenario.
– Determine whether the scenario is **broadly utopian or broadly dystopian**:
– Recognizing there can be gray areas, but they should choose the more dominant tone.
**Counter-Narrative Writing Task**
– Once labeled, students had to:
– Write a **short response** on that same tab (preferably in red font), **arguing the opposite framing**:
– If the original was **utopian**, their response should sketch out how:
– The same policy solution could **backfire** or introduce new harms.
– For example:
– A voter database intended to reduce polarization might:
– Enable corporations or parties to **micro-target citizens** with manipulative messages everywhere (phones, fridges, wearables).
– Deepen surveillance and erode privacy.
– If the original was **dystopian**, they should imagine how:
– The policy might actually **mitigate harms** or generate some **positive, utopian** outcomes.
– Purpose:
– Push students to:
– Recognize that **no policy is purely good or purely bad**.
– See both **benefits and risks** of their own proposals.
– Generate **richer, more nuanced** futures for their speculative narrative.
—
### 9. Conceptual Return to the Smart Fridge: Terms of Service and Data Sharing
**Transition to Theory Integration**
– With time running short, the instructor began to connect:
– The **smart fridge** health insurance example, and
– The need to integrate **course readings** into the speculative narrative.
**Key Question Raised (Not Fully Explored Due to Time)**
– Why did the fridge report ice cream data to the insurance company?
– How is the insurance company **legally/contractually allowed** to access that data?
– Students were reminded of:
– The earlier class discussion on **Amazon Alexa** and its **Terms of Service** (ToS).
**Analogy with Amazon Alexa**
– Alexa is marketed as a **helpful assistant**, but the ToS reveal:
– By activating and using Alexa, users **grant Amazon:**
– Permission to collect recordings and interaction logs.
– Rights to use this data for:
– Training AI/LLM models.
– Tailoring ads.
– Potentially sharing/selling data to other entities.
**Applying This to the Smart Fridge Scenario**
– The instructor suggested:
– When the family installs their new **Samsung smart fridge** (for example):
– A screen appears asking them to accept **terms and conditions**.
– They want the cool features (inventory tracking, automatic shopping list, etc.).
– A family member likely **just taps “Agreeâ€�** without reading.
– Hidden within those terms:
– The company may have reserved the right to:
– Collect data on fridge contents and usage patterns.
– Sell that data to **third parties**, including **insurance companies**.
– This exemplifies:
– **Surveillance capitalism**: everyday devices generating monetizable data exhaust.
– **Consent challenges**: people click “Agreeâ€� to long, opaque ToS they don’t understand.
– The erosion of a meaningful boundary between **private household life** and **corporate/governmental data use**.
**Planned but Unfinished Discussion**
– The instructor was about to more explicitly:
– Link this scenario to course concepts in detail.
– Model how to embed such concepts into students’ own speculative narratives.
– Time ran out; this deeper breakdown was deferred to the next class.
—
### 10. Closing Logistics and Next Steps
– The instructor noted:
– **Policy memo grading** is in progress; grades should be returned by **Friday night**.
– The **full final assignment instructions** will be posted on **eCourse** (LMS) after the instructor finalizes clarity.
– For the next class (Thursday):
– **No reading is assigned**.
– Students are encouraged to:
– Re-read their **policy memos**.
– Continue refining their **2035 scenarios** from the Google Doc.
– Think about how to connect their policy’s long-term effects to:
– Specific **AI–democracy events**.
– Recognizable **course concepts**.
– A non-course-specific note:
– One student coordinated with the instructor about doing extra-credit work for another class, scheduling it for **next Tuesday at 12:00**.
—
## Actionable Items
### High Priority (Instructor)
– **Post Final Assignment Prompt**
– Upload the full **speculative narrative assignment instructions** to eCourse, including:
– Exact requirements (length, citations, number of course/external sources).
– Detailed descriptions and examples of the three narrative templates.
– Explicit grading criteria (concept use, creativity, clarity, etc.).
– **Finish and Return Policy Memo Grades**
– Complete grading of midterm **policy memos**.
– Post grades and, if possible, short written feedback by **Friday night**, as promised.
### High Priority (Students)
– **Revisit Midterm Policy Memos**
– Re-read the problem and solution you proposed.
– Clarify, in one sentence:
– The core **problem**.
– The **policy solution** adopted in 2025 (for your narrative timeline).
– **Develop 2035 Scenario Further**
– Expand your brainstorming from the Google Doc:
– Flesh out both **utopian** and **dystopian** trajectories of your policy solution.
– Consider:
– Who benefits? Who is harmed?
– Which institutions gain power? Which lose it?
– How AI systems and data practices evolve by 2035.
– **Begin Selecting a Narrative Template**
– Decide whether you are leaning toward:
– **Day in the Life**, **Crisis Log**, **Retrospective**, or a custom structure.
– Start sketching:
– Main character(s) or focal institution.
– Central event or crisis.
– How your earlier policy memo world-building fits into this narrative.
– **Identify Relevant Course Concepts & Readings**
– Make a shortlist of at least **3 course concepts** you expect to use.
– Identify at least **3 course readings** that best support your envisioned 2035 scenario.
– Begin collecting **at least 3 external sources** (e.g., recent reports on AI governance, deepfakes, surveillance, elections).
### Medium Priority (Instructor)
– **Next-Class Planning**
– Prepare Thursday’s lesson to:
– Explicitly connect the **smart fridge scenario** to:
– Surveillance capitalism.
– Algorithmic risk scoring and discrimination.
– Consent, ToS, and data governance.
– Provide concrete examples of how to embed such concepts smoothly into a narrative.
– **Check Google Doc Setup**
– Ensure all students have:
– A properly labeled tab.
– Entered both their own 2035 speculation and a peer’s counter-utopian/dystopian scenario.
### Medium Priority (Students)
– **Refine Utopian/Dystopian Counterpart**
– Revisit the peer response you wrote in the shared Google Doc:
– Expand or clarify your **opposite scenario** if needed.
– Think about whether this counterfactual could serve as:
– A subplot.
– A “what could go wrongâ€� section.
– Or a tension point in your final narrative.
### Lower Priority / Administrative
– **Extra-Credit Appointment (Other Course)**
– Student and instructor have scheduled extra-credit work for **next Tuesday at 12:00** (other class).
– Confirm time/location via email or LMS message closer to the date if needed.
—
This report should allow you to reconstruct not only the flow of this class session but also the pedagogical arc: grounding students in a vivid, plausible future scenario; introducing the speculative narrative as a capstone assignment; and beginning structured brainstorming that connects their earlier policy work to narrative futures framed by utopia and dystopia.
Homework Instructions:
ASSIGNMENT #1: Speculative Narrative – AI, Democracy, and the Year 2035
You will write a speculative narrative set in the year 2035 that explores how AI technologies shape democracy and everyday life. Instead of producing a traditional research essay, you will tell a story that uses course concepts (e.g., surveillance capitalism, algorithmic oppression) to imagine a believable future scenario—showing how these ideas affect real people and political systems, rather than just defining them abstractly.
Instructions:
1. **Clarify the core task and constraints**
1.1. Your narrative must be set in the year **2035** (or written *from* slightly later than 2035 looking back at that year, in the “retrospective� option below).
1.2. Length: **5–8 pages** of prose. Five full pages is acceptable; do not exceed eight pages.
1.3. Your piece should focus on the **“AI–democracy nexus�**: how AI systems, data, and algorithms interact with democratic institutions, elections, rights, or everyday civic life.
1.4. This is a **narrative**, not a standard argumentative essay. It should read like a story (or collection of documents that tells a story), even though it is built on serious concepts and research.
1.5. **Due date:** **December 22**. Plan your work so that you can revise before that date.
2. **Decide on your narrative template (or design your own)**
You may choose one of the three suggested templates or invent another narrative structure of your own.
2.1. **Option A – “A Day in the Life�**
– Imagine a specific person in 2035 (which may or may not be you) going through a significant day that reveals how AI and democracy interact.
– Examples:
– A journalist in 2035 covering a deepfake scandal involving a politician.
– A civil servant managing an AI-driven voting system.
– A voter dealing with hyper-targeted political ads powered by AI.
– You follow this character through the day as they encounter a key event related to AI and democracy (e.g., a scandal, an election, a protest, the unveiling of a new AI law).
2.2. **Option B – “Crisis Log�**
– Construct a **series of documents** that together tell the story of an AI–democracy crisis in 2035.
– Possible document types (you choose which to include):
– News articles
– Government memos or internal emails
– Press releases
– Excerpts from speeches
– Wikipedia entries
– NGO reports, etc.
– Example crisis themes:
– A scandal involving AI-driven voter targeting and election manipulation.
– A massive data leak revealing surveillance of political dissidents.
– An AI-based policing system triggering a constitutional crisis.
– The documents, when read together, should allow the reader to reconstruct what happened and why it matters for democracy.
2.3. **Option C – “Retrospective�**
– Write as if you are in an even **later future (e.g., 2050)** looking back on what happened in 2035.
– The narrative can take the form of a **textbook chapter**, an extended encyclopedia entry, or a “history of the futureâ€� essay.
– You explain, in a cohesive narrative, what key AI–democracy developments took place in 2035 and what their consequences were.
2.4. **Option D – Your own narrative structure**
– You may use another narrative style inspired by fiction or non-fiction you’ve read (for example, letters, diaries, multiple intertwined viewpoints, etc.).
– Requirements if you design your own format:
– It must still be set around 2035 and focused on AI and democracy.
– It must be **your own original plot and text** (no copying or lightly rewriting an existing book/film).
– It must allow you to clearly integrate course concepts and research.
3. **Revisit your midterm policy memo as a starting point (optional but recommended)**
3.1. Re-read your **policy memo** from the midterm. Recall: in that memo you proposed a **solution** to an AI–democracy problem that would be implemented around **2025**.
3.2. Imagine that your proposal **actually was adopted** in 2025. Fast-forward to 2035:
– What has changed in your country/region?
– Did your solution work as planned?
– Did it create unintended consequences (good or bad)?
– How have the underlying technologies evolved in 10 years?
3.3. You can build your narrative around:
– A **utopian** evolution of your policy (it helped fix things, improved democracy, reduced harms),
– A **dystopian** evolution (it made things worse, enabled more control, increased inequality),
– Or a mixed, realistic scenario with both gains and new problems.
3.4. You are not required to base your story on your policy memo, but it is an excellent ready-made seed for your 2035 scenario.
4. **Define the central event, tension, or question of your story**
4.1. Your narrative should revolve around a specific **event, crisis, or transformative development** linked to AI and democracy, such as:
– A national election shaped by AI-driven microtargeting or disinformation.
– A new law that allows data from “smartâ€� devices (like the smart fridge example) to be shared with insurers, law enforcement, or political campaigns.
– A scandal where an AI system wrongfully labels activists as “security threats.â€�
– The introduction (or banning) of a powerful algorithm used in governance.
4.2. Formulate for yourself a core guiding question, such as:
– “What happens when home devices feed data directly into systems that affect citizens’ rights and costs (like insurance or voting access)?â€�
– “How would democracy function if deepfakes become indistinguishable from reality?â€�
– “What does ‘informed consent’ look like when every digital interaction feeds into political profiling?â€�
4.3. Let this central issue shape the plot: characters’ decisions, conflicts, and the overall arc of the narrative should revolve around it.
5. **Choose your characters and perspective (if relevant to your template)**
5.1. For **Day in the Life** and many custom narratives, you should select at least one clear **protagonist**:
– This could be “youâ€� in 2035, or a fictional person: journalist, activist, bureaucrat, engineer, ordinary voter, etc.
5.2. You *may* include dialogue, but it is **not required**. It is acceptable to write mostly or entirely in **third person** (e.g., “She wakes up to an alert from her smart fridge…�).
5.3. Avoid using conversations merely to drop in course vocabulary (e.g., “As Shoshana Zuboff once stated, this is surveillance capitalism�).
– Instead, show how surveillance capitalism or algorithmic oppression is playing out in your characters’ lives.
5.4. For **Crisis Log**, your “characters� may be implicit (e.g., politicians, journalists, citizens whose voices appear in the documents) rather than followed continuously like a novel.
5.5. For **Retrospective**, the “character� is partly the **narrator** (a historian, analyst, or textbook author in 2050), who frames and explains what occurred in 2035.
6. **Integrate course concepts and readings meaningfully**
6.1. Your narrative must use at least **three key course concepts** (for example):
– surveillance capitalism
– algorithmic oppression
– datafication
– algorithmic governance
– predictive policing
– facial recognition and bias
– platform power, etc.
6.2. You must draw on at least **three readings from the course**.
– These ideas should support the plausibility of your future scenario—i.e., you extrapolate from current trends we studied.
6.3. You must also use at least **three external sources** beyond the course readings. These could include:
– Recent news articles about AI and politics
– Policy reports
– Academic papers or reputable think-tank reports
– Books or high-quality investigative pieces
6.4. Your future is **speculative but evidence-based**:
– You are not “predicting the futureâ€� with certainty, but you are making reasonable projections grounded in present research and trends.
6.5. Show the concepts **in action** rather than only naming them. For example:
– Instead of saying, “This is surveillance capitalism,â€� depict how data from a smart fridge flows to insurers, which then adjust premiums based on inferred health risks.
– Instead of saying, “This is algorithmic oppression,â€� show how an AI policing system disproportionately flags certain communities.
7. **Decide on your overall tone: utopian, dystopian, or mixed**
7.1. Reflect on whether your 2035 is primarily:
– **Utopian** (a mostly “goodâ€� future with reduced suffering and strengthened democracy),
– **Dystopian** (a mostly “badâ€� future marked by oppression, injustice, and loss of freedom),
– Or genuinely **ambivalent/mixed** (some improvements, some serious new problems).
7.2. Whichever you choose, make sure the tone is supported by concrete details:
– Laws that changed, technologies that exist, institutional responses, and lived experiences of people.
7.3. You are encouraged to consider both **benefits and harms**, even if your narrative leans in one direction.
8. **Plan and draft the narrative**
8.1. Sketch an outline before you start writing full pages:
– For **Day in the Life**: list key moments in the day where AI–democracy issues appear (e.g., morning interaction with a device; mid-day news about a scandal; evening confrontation or decision).
– For **Crisis Log**: list the sequence of documents and what new information each one reveals.
– For **Retrospective**: outline the “background,â€� “key events in 2035,â€� and “long-term consequences.â€�
8.2. Decide where and how to embed your sources and concepts:
– A news article excerpt might mention a study (course reading).
– A textbook-like section might summarize debates we covered.
– A character might recall prior scandals or laws that mirror things we analyzed in class.
8.3. Write your **first full draft** without worrying too much about perfection—focus on getting the entire story down, from beginning to end.
9. **Revise for clarity, plausibility, and conceptual depth**
9.1. Reread your draft asking:
– Does the narrative clearly take place around **2035**, and is that time frame plausible given where we are now?
– Is the central AI–democracy issue easy to identify and follow?
– Do the course concepts feel naturally integrated rather than just “dropped inâ€�?
9.2. Remove or rework any **forced dialogue** that exists only to define a term. Replace it with scenes or descriptions that *demonstrate* the idea.
9.3. Check that your use of sources supports your imagined future:
– Are you building on real concerns, laws, technologies, and debates we know about today?
– Do you show logical continuities between 2025 (or now) and 2035?
9.4. Tighten the pacing:
– Ensure that each page advances the story or deepens your analysis of the AI–democracy relationship.
– Remove repetitive sections or tangents that do not serve your core event or question.
10. **Cite your sources appropriately**
10.1. Provide clear **citations** for all course readings and external sources you draw on.
10.2. Include a **reference list / bibliography** at the end of your narrative.
10.3. Use a consistent citation style (APA, MLA, Chicago, etc.); you may choose the style, but keep it uniform throughout the paper.
10.4. Remember:
– All writing and narrative ideas must be **your own original work**.
– Do not copy plots or structures from existing fiction, and do not outsource the writing to AI tools.
11. **Final checks and submission**
11.1. Verify that your narrative:
– Is **5–8 pages** in length, not counting your reference list.
– Clearly engages with **AI and democracy** as its central theme.
– Uses at least **3 course concepts**, **3 course readings**, and **3 external sources**.
11.2. Proofread for grammar, coherence, and formatting so that your narrative is easy to follow.
11.3. Submit your completed narrative by **December 22** following the usual procedure for written assignments for this course.
Use this assignment to demonstrate that you can connect theoretical ideas—like surveillance, data, and power—to concrete, human experiences in a plausible near future. The more you can make 2035 feel real and grounded in what we know today, the stronger your speculative narrative will be.