Villa Bosch, a third year of fake intimate images: the problem is no longer AI, it's how the school responds

By Aire de Santa Fe · October 16, 2026.

Students and parents protested outside the Instituto Murialdo in Villa Bosch (Tres de Febrero district, Buenos Aires province). They allege that classmates used artificial intelligence to alter photos of teenage girls and circulated them as if they were real intimate images. According to the outlet, which draws on testimony broadcast by A24, the school belongs to the same educational community as Pío XII.

Families say this is not an isolated case, claiming similar incidents occurred in each of the two previous years. According to those accounts, the school asked the affected students to stay discreet on those occasions. The protest was organized by the students themselves. These are allegations made by the families; the article does not include the school's response, nor does it report any legal proceedings in this specific case.

One mother who took part said that in earlier cases, victims kept sharing playgrounds and classrooms with the classmates identified as responsible. According to her account, some girls end up leaving the school. "This is being treated like a joke, and it's not a joke," said another mother.

The technique itself is well known: generative AI can produce a fake nude image from an ordinary photo of a clothed person. Today all it takes is a consumer tool and a few minutes. The fact that the scene never happened does not lessen the harm: humiliation, harassment and loss of privacy. When the victims are minors, it is even more serious.

**Our take.** The technology side of this story is settled, for the worse: the barrier to producing this material is gone and will not come back. What can still change is the human response. Asking victims to stay discreet, if the families' allegations are confirmed, shifts the burden: those who suffer the abuse bear the silence and the cost of continuing to share space with the perpetrators, while the problem repeats the next school year. That it has happened three years running is precisely the sign that no working protocol was in place.

The pattern resembles other recent cases in schools across the region: a trivial technology causes the harm, and an institution that treats the matter as an internal issue or a prank makes it worse. A prepared school needs three things: a written protocol for handling these cases, immediate protective measures for the affected students (without forcing them to leave their environment), and explicit education on digital consent, with clear and proportionate consequences for those who create or share such content.

The short term is uncomfortable: an entire generation of teenagers is growing up with a harassment tool a phone tap away, and school rules and laws are lagging behind. But the long term does not depend on banning the technology, which is unfeasible, but on building social norms and institutions to govern it. The same AI used today to humiliate a classmate will, with good governance, drive the medicine and abundance we advocate for. Reaching that horizon means starting with the basics: no student should have to stay silent so the school can keep the peace.