Brazil's Superior Electoral Court fined Meta R$7.5 million, unanimously, for ignoring its orders in the Lula-Flávio runoff, in a case brought by Lula's campaign. The court did not find that Meta deliberately favored Flávio Bolsonaro, and the company denies it.
BRASILIA — Brazil’s Superior Electoral Court (TSE) voted unanimously on Tuesday to fine Meta R$7.5 million, about US$1.3 million, for failing to follow its orders during the presidential election, Estadão and Jovem Pan reported. The case was filed by President Luiz Inácio Lula da Silva’s campaign, which accused the company of deliberately favoring Sen. Flávio Bolsonaro (PL-RJ) in the runoff. Meta denies favoring any candidate or interfering in the vote.
The case rested on three episodes. Instagram’s ad-boosting tool was unavailable for nearly 24 hours on Oct. 9 and 10, according to Jovem Pan. In October, Meta admitted a mistake that took down Lula’s ad account and a technical failure that cut the view counts of posts, but said both were global and did not hit any profile harder than others. Lula’s allies dispute that and say the impact fell on left-wing users and supporters of the president. And an image tool on WhatsApp refused to generate content about Lula while producing content about Flávio, Estadão reported.
Why it matters
An American company was fined by a Brazilian court over how its automated systems treated two candidates, on a complaint from the side that won. The rapporteur, Justice Marco Aurélio Bellizze, wrote that when a private company can significantly shape how citizens are exposed to political information, “its decisions stop producing only commercial consequences.” He added that global agents such as financial speculators and tech companies exert forces “the State cannot control.” The other six justices on the panel followed him, among them André Mendonça, Dias Toffoli and Kassio Nunes Marques.
For American readers, the reasoning is the point. The court is claiming the power to police how a platform’s algorithms and AI tools treat campaigns, and it did so on a standard the company has to prove it met. Lula’s lawyer, Angelo Longo Ferraro, argued that no proof of intent was needed: “a mistake, repeated, is not just a mistake, it is a pattern.” He also said Brazil’s president “will not be chosen by Silicon Valley or by Washington.”
The record
What is documented: the fine, the unanimous vote and Bellizze’s finding that Meta did not hand over information the court required, missed deadlines and did not ensure equal treatment of the two campaigns. Per Estadão, Meta had committed to document its review flow until Oct. 25 and the period closed without a full accounting. What the court did not find: according to Jovem Pan and Latin Times, it could not prove deliberate favoritism toward Flávio Bolsonaro. What is alleged: favoritism and the use of foreign money to boost content for the senator, both claims from Lula’s coalition. Meta says the ad-boost failure was a global problem and that it presented its documents transparently.
The fine rests on non-compliance, not bias, yet the campaign that benefited is selling it as proof that a foreign platform tried to pick Brazil’s president. Under the Lula regime, a company that was already before Brazilian judges after silencing an Acre newsroom before the runoff now has to prove neutrality to the electoral court, with a “pattern” argument that needs no intent. Every other platform will read that as the new rule.
The Watch Post Daily will continue to follow this story. Sources: Estadão; Jovem Pan; Le Monde; Latin Times.
Featured image: Meta i Almedalen by VisbyStar, via Wikimedia Commons, CC BY-SA 4.0.
COMMENTS