Case 1 Deepfake and AI EthicsCase 1 – Deepfake and AI EthicsTask 1: Explain the ethical and digital risks that occurredIn August 2025, various Indonesian media reported the viral deepfake scam to have involved Raffi Ahmad, a public figure. This manipulated video, which was spread through WhatsApp and other platforms, depicted a fake video call of Raffi Ahmad offering a reward of Rp 100 million to people who had been tricked. Times Indonesia and Okezone reported that the scam used AI-generated facial and voice synthesis to make the video look real. This case is an example of how ethical and digital risks are increasingly intertwined with deepfake technology in Indonesia’s online ecosystem.From an ethical point of view, the event is very much against the main principles of truth, consent, and accountability in the digital world. The image and the voice of Raffi Ahmad were taken and used without permission, in other words, his identity and dignity rights were broken. The impersonation in this way manipulates the trust that the public has, the trust being the credibility of a celebrity that now is used to mislead the audience. The video scam thus unfolded also reveals the digital literacy level behind which many users took the video for real without checking where it came from. This is a prime example of what media scholars label information disorder, i.e., the mixture of misinformation and malice that is facilitated by algorithms and content-sharing speed.Deepfakes have various negative effects, among which are the potential use for identity theft, causing defamation, and manipulating the public perception. In a more significant sense, the synthetic media in question undermines the trust in what is visually proven and weakens the integrity of online communication. The risk for the individuals is beyond just money, it may also cause a psychological state where the victim feels embarrassed or violated because the victim thinks he/she was tricked by a realistic yet fake video. The Raffi Ahmad case is a perfect example of how urgent it is to have AI literacy and ethical safeguards in place for the prevention of the misuse of generative technologies.Task 2: Connect your explanation to relevant articles in the ITE Law, PDP Law, and Copyright LawIndonesian legal system already has frameworks that can handle this situation.According to the electronic Information and Transactions Law (ITE Law) No. 11 of 2008, Article 27 paragraph (3) prohibits the defamation of the electronic distribution of content that harms a person’s reputation. The tricksters who used Raffi Ahmad’s image to do a fraud might also be breach of Article 28 paragraph (1) which prohibit the spreading of fake news that results in public confusions or financial losses.The Personal Data Protection Law (No. 27 of 2022) specification-wise, indicates biometric identification data such as facial features and voice as secure personal information. Article 58 states that the usage of such data entitles the user to get permission beforehand. The deepfake creator was not authorized to produce the content as they were in violation of these rules; hence it can be said that they committed privacy and identity offenses.The Copyright Law (No. 28 of 2014), Article 9, on the other hand, endows the individual with moral rights over his/her image and prohibits the changes that would harm the individual’s reputation or mislead the public. Changing Raffi Ahmad’s look and then sharing it for profits or lying to the people is going against those moral rights directly.On the whole, these acts demonstrate that Indonesia, through legislation, is well aware that deepfake is a kind of multi-violation that results in defamation, data theft, and copyright infringement. However, enforcing the law is still a tough job because it requires high cyber-forensic skills to track down the criminals behind AI-generated content.Task 3: Design a campus AI Code of Ethics to prevent similar casesUniversities can only tackle the problem by making use of AI an educational opportunity for digital literacy. A campus AI code of ethics may consist of the following points:Firstly, Transparency & Disclosure: A student or faculty member has to inform others when a piece of work is AI-generated.Secondly, Consent & Privacy: The creation or alteration of a person’s image, voice, or information without the person’s consent is strictly prohibited.Thirdly, Authenticity Labeling: AI-generated content needs to have visible labels (e.g., “AI-Generated”) so that the viewers are aware and there is no deception.Fourthly, Ethical AI Training: Weaving AI literacy subjects in the curriculum which requires students to face deepfake issues, data protection, and ethical problem-solving.Fifthly, Accountability Mechanism: There should be a digital ethics board that listens to the grievances, issues penalties, and takes other actions against the violations.Sixthly, Legal Compliance: AI assignments on campus have to follow laws ITE, PDP, and Copyright for the safety of rights.Seventhly, Community Engagement: Many ways such as seminars, workshops, tours, and society dialogue, can be used to create awareness about the title “Don’t be Deepfake Victims” thus educate the public and students in checking digital genuineness.The adoption of these norms by the educational institutions will enable campuses to not just produce the technically proficient graduates but also those ethically and legally aware in the AI-driven communication age.References:Law No. 11 of 2008 on Electronic Information and Transactions (ITE Law): https://www.flevin.com/id/lgso/translations/JICA%20Mirror/english/4846_UU_11_2008_e.htmlLaw No. 27 of 2022 on Personal Data Protection (PDP Law): https://jdih.denpasarkota.go.id/public/produk-hukum/monografi-hukum/buku-hukum/law-of-the-republic-of-indonesia-number-27-of-2022-on-personal-data-protectionLaw No. 28 of 2014 on Copyright: https://www.wipo.int/wipolex/en/legislation/details/15600Pojok Baca (2025). Viral Penipuan Deepfake Gunakan Wajah Raffi Ahmad Janjikan Hadiah Rp 100 Juta di WhatsApp. https://www.pojokbaca.id/berita/226473209Okezone (2025). Viral Penipuan Pakai Wajah dan Suara AI, Raffi Ahmad: Hati-Hati, Hoax! https://celebrity.okezone.com/read/2025/08/25/33/3165179Wardle, C., & Derakhshan, H. (2017). Information Disorder: Toward an Interdisciplinary Framework. Council of Europe. https://edoc.coe.int/en/media/7495-information-disorder-toward-an-interdisciplinary-framework-for-research-and-policy-making.htmlCase 2 – Hoax and Digital SecurityTask 1: Explain how hoaxes and phishing work technically and psychologicallyDuring the last few years, cyber crimes in Indonesia have increased drastically. One of the main ways in which these crimes spread is via WhatsApp messages, a very popular app in the country. In 2025, Jawapos.com reported that WhatsApp was the primary target of online fraud. Fraudsters would send messages that contained links to malicious apps or fake rewards, thus tricking users into giving out their personal and banking data. The users were forced to download files or click on links that lead to fake websites or “.apk” applications a typical case of phishing and social engineering.On the technical side, phishing involves the production of fake communication that looks like it comes from a trusted source. Here, the scammers send a link which looks like an invitation, prize offer, or service update. The fake site then collects the user’s details or installs spyware that can get the user’s credentials from banking apps or e-wallets. The virus link is rarely detected by antivirus systems because users are the ones who open it and give the malware the necessary permissions themselves.On the psychological aspect, hoaxes and phishing use the emotions of the victims to trigger certain feelings like urgency, curiosity, and trust. For example, scammers create messages like “Congratulations! You’ve been awarded with Rp 5 million click to get it now” which in turn creates the fear of missing out (FOMO) among users and thus incites them to act blindly. According to Hobbs (2017), users of low digital literacy tend to use heuristic processing quick, emotional reaction instead of carefully verifying the issue. In Indonesia, where trust in the family and community is still very strong, scammers take advantage of these social bonds by pretending to be people you know, thereby gaining even more trust. The combination of technical deception and psychological manipulation is what makes phishing so effective.Task 2: Describe digital safety steps (Level 1-4) users should takeBased on the Kominfo digital-literacy framework, digital safety can be described as four successive levels that gradually build up a user’s resilience to phishing and hoaxes.1. Level 1-Awareness: Users should be able to identify suspicious content. Among the criteria for this is recognizing a message that is unexpected and contains a link, identifying a file which is unusual for the user (like “.apk”), and noticing that the sender is urging the receiver to do something immediately. Kominfo and Siberkreasi (2023) pinpointed awareness as the first line of defense realizing that not everything that is online is real.2. Level 2-Verification:Before interacting with or sharing a post, users ought to verify the data by checking with the official sources or using fact-checking services like Turn Back Hoax or CekFakta.id. Verification in tech terms means doing the following: looking over the domain names, turning on the two-factor authentication (2FA), and getting applications only from trusted stores (Google Play, App Store) instead of downloading files from random websites.3. Level 3-Responsible Practice:Ethical responsibility lies at the core of digital literacy. Users must not be engaged in the activity of forwarding unverified messages, educating their family members or peers, and reporting any phishing attempts to the authorities that are relevant. Employing digital empathy-thinking about the results of spreading false information-is one of the components of this stage.4. Level 4-Advocacy and Policy:On the topmost rung, the individuals and the institutions become the proponents of digital safety. For instance, universities can create and run campaigns for awareness, compose rules for cybersecurity in the campus, and work in partnership with the agencies like BSSN (National Cyber and Crypto Agency) or Kominfo. Advocacy is, thus, a tool that strengthens the communal resistance to cybercrime.These stages, when combined, give users the power not only to keep themselves away from scams but also to take an active part in creating a safer digital culture.Task 3: Analyze the social, economic, and legal impacts of poor digital literacyThe proliferation of hoaxes and phishing via WhatsApp is a clear indication of the Indonesian struggle with digital literacy. A report by Jawapos.com (2025) indicates that most cases of phishing in the country are the result of activities in instant messaging apps which is the primary reason that communication based on trust is so easily manipulated.Social Impact:Hoaxes and phishing destroy trust in digital communities. Those who have been cheated may become more doubtful and even frightened or digital tools, thus the change towards digital will be slow at the national level. The misinformation issue also negatively affects social relationships when people unintentionally become distributors of harmful content.Economic Impact:In terms of money, phishing causes financial losses that are direct. The victims can lose access to their bank accounts, e-wallet balances, or digital payment platforms. Phishing-related losses amount to several billion rupiah as per the Cyber Threat Landscape Indonesia 2024 report by BSSN. A situation of such crimes going rampant is bad news for consumer confidence in e-commerce and fintech which, in turn, slows down the digital economy of Indonesia. Legal Impact:From a legal point of view, these deeds could be considered punishable under these Indonesian legislations:ITE Law Article 28 paragraph (1): It prohibits the distribution of false or misleading electronic information that causes losses to consumers.PDP Law Article 55: It mandates organizations to take measures in protecting user data from unauthorized access.Criminal Code (KUHP) and Law No. 8 of 2010: refer to fraudulent transactions and money laundering charges arising from the use of stolen data.On the other hand, poor digital literacy hinders law enforcement as well because victims are seldom in a position to present the digital evidence, hence prosecution becomes difficult. Therefore, upgrading digital skills is equally a social requirement and a legal protection.Practical RecommendationsThe following measures are proposed as a solution to the above-mentioned problems:1. Campus Cyber Safety Program: The program of regularly holding workshops simulating phishing scenarios so as to train students and staff should be put into practice.2. BSSN and Kominfo Collaboration: It would be great if they were doing campaigns that remind people of the indicators of hoaxes and that posting them on social media is an effective way to get the message across.3. Digital Hygiene Curriculum: Besides, “Cyber Safety and Ethics” could be a module in digital-literacy courses.4. Technology-Based Prevention: It is good to have password managers, secure browsers, and verified app installations5. Community Reporting Channels: It will be helpful if public reporting will be supported through Kominfo’s Aduan Konten and BSSN’s Cyber Incident Response Center (ID-SIRTII) services.With the help of technological innovations, education, and ethics, the Indonesian society will be able to construct a digital environment that is more resilient and trustworthy.References:Jawapos.com (2025). WhatsApp Jadi Sasaran Penipuan Daring: Ini Cara Mengenali Scam Berbahaya. https://www.jawapos.com/teknologi/015491483/whatsapp-jadi-sasaran-penipuan-daring-ini-cara-mengenali-scam-berbahayaLaw No. 11 of 2008 on Electronic Information and Transactions (ITE Law): https://www.flevin.com/id/lgso/translations/JICA%20Mirror/english/4846_UU_11_2008_e.htmlLaw No. 27 of 2022 on Personal Data Protection (PDP Law): https://jdih.denpasarkota.go.id/public/produk-hukum/monografi-hukum/buku-hukum/law-of-the-republic-of-indonesia-number-27-of-2022-on-personal-data-protectionBSSN (2024). Cyber Threat Landscape Indonesia 2024. https://www.cybersecurity.or.id/2025/07/lanskap-keamanan-siber-indonesia-2024.htmlHobbs, R. (2017). Create to Learn: Introduction to Digital Literacy. Wiley. https://books.google.com/books?id=k08nDwAAQBAJCase 6 – Provocative Social Media ContentTask 1: Describe the ethical and social issues involvedIn 2024, through DISA.org, Koalisi Cek Fakta (Indonesian Fact-Checking Coalition) gave a warning to the public about the fast spread of the disinformation related to the national protests. Misleading posts and cropped videos were at the top of their game in X (Twitter) and TikTok, showing riot footage that was falsely linked to the local areas. Some pieces of content claimed that student groups were the puppets of foreign organizations, while others used edited clips to show figures of the opposition as violent. These posts reached millions of views before fact-checkers were able to clarify that they had been taken out of context or were deliberately altered.From an ethical standpoint, this series of events illustrates the failure of digital responsibility and media ethics. The act of posting or sharing without verifying emotionally charged content that is aimed at misleading the audience is netiquette that is violated. Netiquette refers to the set of rules for respectful and responsible communication on the net, which also involves giving other people’s work proper credits and verifying the information before sharing it. Users who repost or comment in an aggressive manner are responsible for digital aggression and public polarization. This, to a large extent, is what Wardle and Derakhshan (2017) define as information disorder: a mixture of misinformation, disinformation, and malinformation that affects the perception and causes division.As far as the society is concerned, such inflammatory materials generate distrust, rage, and offensive speech. The division that is happening online is, most of the time, the reason for the hostility in the real world that is a kind of vicious circle. It, therefore, leads to the creation or reinforcement of stereotypes or discrimination. The disinformation about the 2024 protest crisis turned out to be not only a digital phenomenon but also a civic one that it, therefore, weakens the social fabric and diminishes democratic dialogue. From the psychological point of view, emotionally charged images arouse moral indignation and confirmation bias, which leads to people reacting instead of reflecting. Whenever emotions take over the rational evaluation, truth becomes secondary to identity and group loyalty. This is the reason why ethical digital citizenship, which is the capability of handling online spaces in a responsible way, is very important to be able to prevent the occurrence of harm in the digital society.Task 2: Connect the incident to Indonesian lawsThe promulgation of incendiary as well as deceptive pieces of information is limited by a couple of Indonesian laws protecting individuals and public order, namely:Information and Electronic Transactions (ITE) Law (Law No. 11 of 2008), Article 27(3), prohibits the production and distribution of any content that defames or harms the reputation of others.Article 28(2) prohibits the provision of information in an electronic system, which is intended to incite hatred or hostility between individuals or groups.Article 35 makes it a punishable offense to manipulate or falsify electronic data leading to public harm.These statements are aimed at those who purposely edit, distort, or in any other way inaccurately portray videos or transcripts of protests with an intend to incite social conflicts.Besides that, the Law No. 27 of 2022 on Personal Data Protection (PDP Law) is aimed at safeguarding people’s likeness and identity from being mishandled in the digital realm. If someone’s image is taken out of a video and is used for the purpose of deceiving people, then it is definitely a violation of personal-data rights.Last but not least, the Press Law (No. 40 of 1999) and Broadcasting Law (No. 32 of 2002) emphasis the necessity of being truthful and impartial when giving out news to the public are the main ideas these laws revolve around. This is in agreement with the moral aspect of the digital literacy, i.e. truth and accountability in online communication.Task 3: Design a digital-literacy campaign to prevent similar incidentsTo fight against the negative effects of the provoking content shared online, a digital literacy campaign led by universities and youth communities and named: “Think Before You Share: Context Matters.”The campaign should work on awareness, education, and ethical empowerment by providing these activities:1. Critical-Thinking Workshops – Inform students how to check sources, recognize doctored videos, and confirm facts by using tools like CekFakta.id, Turn Back Hoax, and Google Fact Check Explorer.2. Digital Empathy Training – Provide knowledge on how personal actions in the digital world affect others; implement the practice of talking in a polite manner and constructive disagreement.3. Collaboration with MAFINDO and Kominfo/Siberkreasi – Let Kominfo’s Four Pillars of Digital Literacy (Ethics, Culture, Safety, and Skills) be the ethical and educational base of the campaign.4. Campus Verification Teams – Volunteer students as “digital fact-checkers” who find and report incorrect information and produce the explanatory infographics.5. AI-Assisted Monitoring – Deploy generative-AI identification instruments to locate the deepfake or context-manipulated content.6. Community Engagement – Cooperate with the local media, NGOs, and religious groups to encourage correct online behavior and to prevent hate speech.By using these methods, the campaign not only will be successful in bringing the issue to the public’s attention but also in creating a culture of responsible digital citizenship, which puts more focus on ethics rather than emotions, and on truth rather than virality.ConclusionThe DISA.org incident exemplifies that Indonesia’s digital society is confronted with challenges of a moral nature along with technological ones. A few of such challenges are disinformation and provocative content that not only interfere with social harmony but also decrease the trust in the public discourse. The remedy for this problem is more than just regulation; it calls for education, empathy, and collective vigilance. Therefore universities, as the main players, have the obligation to become ethical incubators, producing digitally literate citizens who are capable of critical thinking, responsible sharing, and truth upholding in the digital public sphere.References:DISA.org (2024). Indonesian Fact-Checkers Caution Public Regarding Disinformation Surrounding Protests. https://disa.org/indonesian-fact-checkers-caution-public-regarding-disinformation-surrounding-protestsLaw No. 11 of 2008 on Electronic Information and Transactions (ITE Law): https://www.flevin.com/id/lgso/translations/JICA%20Mirror/english/4846_UU_11_2008_e.htmlLaw No. 27 of 2022 on Personal Data Protection (PDP Law): https://jdih.denpasarkota.go.id/public/produk-hukum/monografi-hukum/buku-hukum/law-of-the-republic-of-indonesia-number-27-of-2022-on-personal-data-protectionLaw No. 40 of 1999 on the Press https://assets.tobaccocontrollaws.org/uploads/legislation/Indonesia/Indonesia-Press-Law-No.-40-of-1999.pdf Information Disorder: Toward an Interdisciplinary Framework for Research and Policy‑Making by Claire Wardle & Hossein Derakhshan https://edoc.coe.int/en/media/7495-information-disorder-toward-an-interdisciplinary-framework-for-research-and-policy-making.html Kominfo & Siberkreasi (2023). Empat Pilar Literasi Digital (Etika, Budaya, Aman, Kecakapan Digital). https://gnld.siberkreasi.id/modul/
