Two photographers are competing for business in town. Andrea uses only film photography and Keira uses only digital photography. Keira claims that the digital technology is superior, and her advertisement claims that the images can be stored, shared, and copied more easily. They can even be sent long distances using a series of wave pulses to transmit the information. Andrea replies that digital images can be stolen and altered more easily. Do the advantages outweigh the disadvantages, or do both sides have valid points? Support your answer with at least three reasons

There is no right or wrong answer, your teacher wants you to support your own answer with points. As long as the reasons make logical sense you are fine.

I think they both have valid points. Their replies are both true, but from a buyer's perspective who would you purchase services from? You would get different answers depending on who you ask.

If you choose to go old school, obviously you get an actual photo that can be stored physically. This means it is a memory that can be preserved, and it might feel more nostalgic being able to touch the photo.

On the other hand, a digitally stored photo can be altered (photoshop), but it is forever as long as the internet still exists. A physical photo would fade with time, which doesn't happen with a digital photo.

It is definitely easier to argue that digital photography has more advantages (they do, it is why nobody uses film anymore)

Points you can consider:

Can be transferred to the other side of the world instantly

Ability to make copies and print as many photos as you want

Can be stored on cloud/devices and be like that forever

Compare them with film photography to give a more solid response.