Technologie, numérique et société

1. a)She teaches in the village hall of Alderthwaite, a village of four hundred people in the north of England, every Tuesday evening. (0,5 pt par détail exact ; accepter « for three years » comme second élément.) (1)
2. b)Because, in her experience, the real obstacle is not the cable but the lack of skills and confidence: a better connection does not help people who have never opened an email account. (Toute reformulation opposant access et digital literacy est acceptée.) (1)
3. c)It suggests that essential public services — benefits, healthcare, parking permits — are now only accessible online and are increasingly sorted by automated systems. Citizens who cannot use a form are therefore excluded from their own rights: the digital divide has become a question of citizenship, not merely of technology. (1)
4. d)The participants are no longer frightened by the technology itself; they now question its transparency and its accountability — who designed the algorithm, on which data and in whose interest. It shows a shift from fear to critical awareness, which is precisely what digital citizenship means. (1)

Repère — Dans un texte sur la fracture numérique, distinguez toujours l'accès (le réseau) de la digital literacy (les compétences) : c'est là que se joue la note.

1. a)divide (the digital divide). (1)
2. b)whistleblower (on accepte whistle-blower). (1)
3. c)gig (the gig economy). (1)
4. d)disinformation — et non misinformation, qui suppose la bonne foi. (1)

À retenir — Misinformation et disinformation ne sont pas synonymes : seule la seconde implique une intention de tromper.

1. a)deals (to deal with a subject ; « to treat of » est un calque fautif). (1)
2. b)points (to point out that…). (1)
3. c)According (According to + nom ; jamais « according me »). (1)
4. d)raises (to raise an issue ; to rise est intransitif). (1)

Le point clé — Les tournures d'analyse s'apprennent par fonction — présenter, souligner, opposer, conclure — parce que c'est la fonction que l'on cherche le jour de l'épreuve.

1. a)Currently (ou Nowadays / At present), half of humanity is online. — Refuser actually, qui signifie « en fait ». (1)
2. b)The news is worrying. — News est un indénombrable singulier : refuser « the news are » et « the informations ». (1)
3. c)While some see it as progress, others fear mass surveillance. — Accepter Whereas some… ; progress est indénombrable, donc sans article. (1)
4. d)All things considered, regulating the platforms is necessary. — Accepter « …, the regulation of platforms is necessary ». (1)

Erreur fréquente — News, information, advice, research et evidence ne prennent jamais de s et commandent un verbe au singulier.

1. a)Attendus : sujet posé, repère australien cité, annonce de la ligne argumentative ; présent simple, pas de narration. Proposition : « In 2024, Australia became the first country to ban social media for anyone under sixteen. The decision was presented as a way of protecting teenagers, but it immediately raised the issue of their freedom of expression. This text argues that regulation is necessary, although a total ban is not the right tool. » (1)
2. b)Attendus : un argument clair, un exemple anglophone précis (Cambridge Analytica, Online Safety Act, auditions au Congrès, gig economy), au moins un connecteur d'addition. Proposition : « There is no doubt that platforms are designed to capture attention. Recommendation algorithms keep young users scrolling, and doomscrolling has been linked to anxiety and sleep deprivation. The British Online Safety Act of 2023 was passed precisely because self-regulation had failed. Moreover, teenagers cannot give informed consent to data harvesting they do not even see. » (1)
3. c)Attendus : connecteur concessif en tête, contre-argument développé, pas de simple négation du paragraphe précédent. Proposition : « Admittedly, a ban may do more harm than good. Social media are also a public space where young people organise, campaign and find communities they lack offline. Excluding them would deepen the digital divide, since the teenagers most affected are often those with the fewest alternatives. However, protection and participation are not incompatible. » (1)
4. d)Attendus : réponse nuancée, au moins un modal, une formule de clôture, pas d'argument nouveau. Proposition : « All things considered, governments should regulate design rather than age: transparency, accountability and a right to switch off the algorithm. A ban might silence teenagers, whereas regulation would give them back some control. » (1)

Attention — Une copie qui enchaîne les « I think that » perd des points : variez avec I would argue that, in my view, it seems to me that, et fermez avec all things considered.