Two possible ways of presenting this argument:
a) The Balanced View:
Introduction: Hackers are regarded as the heroes of 21st century
Reasons against: Hackers does not posses the values of a hero(refer to this input). In fact the term “hackers” alone refers to many but not one, and it is hard to discriminate good from bad when generalization is used
Reasons for: Hackers have infiltrated system to reveal inner schemes and human abuse for instance (refer to this input).
Conclusion: Hackers cannot be the heroes of 21st century because they do not posses heroic attributes and most importantly, the term “hackers” is already generalization. Suggest a single person as the hero instead.
b)The Persuasive View:
Introduction: Brief Introduction about hackers and plans to prove that hackers cannot be the hero of 21st century.
Reasons against: White hat hackers have indeed contributed to improvement of company security (refer to this and this input).
Reasons for: Hackers does not possess heroic attributes: when we look at an entity consisting of hackers (in this case Anonymous) we can prove that the hackers, and even Anonymous itself does not fully possess the attributes of a hero. Hence a need to find the “true hero”.
Conclusion: Closes with Aaron Swartz’s case study, and how we as graphic designer (as well as other people) can learn from him.
The latter seems to be a better option. Hmm… :0