In a unanimous decision on Tuesday (Nov. 10), Brazil’s Superior Electoral Court ruled to fine Meta BRL 7.5 million for providing incomplete information regarding allegations of distributing biased political content during this year’s election campaign.
The decision was prompted by a complaint filed by the “Brasil Pronto Pra Mais” (“Brazil ready for more”) coalition, which supported the reelection of President Luiz Inácio Lula da Silva.
The campaign’s legal team accused Meta, which operates the social media platforms Facebook, Instagram, and WhatsApp, of applying differential treatment to limit the reach of Lula’s content and favor the campaign of the defeated candidate Flávio Bolsonaro, of the Liberal Party, or PL.
Attorney Angelo Longo Ferraro cited several irregularities allegedly committed by Meta, such as ads paid for with funds from abroad, the publication of negative advertising using artificial intelligence, and the removal of recommendations for posts favorable to Lula.
“Meta claims it was all an error. But it fails to explain that the error was one-sided. An ongoing error is a pattern,” he stated.
Votes
During the hearing, the opinion of Justice Marco Aurélio Belizze, rapporteur for the case, prevailed.
Justice Belizze stated that he had ordered 17 measures requiring Meta to provide clarifications during the elections, but the company provided incomplete information regarding the identified shortcomings, a fact that made it difficult to verify the accuracy of the allegations.
“The information lacked transparency, as part of it was presented in a foreign language, in aggregated data, and through generic statements,” he stated.
This opinion was shared by six other justices, including the court’s President Kassio Nunes Marques.
The fine does not bring the case to a close. The court will continue to investigate whether Meta favored certain candidates. There is no deadline for a final ruling.
Society organizations announced that they had sent a letter to President Lula requesting that the government adopt measures to regulate the platforms, such as rules for removing and suspending content and accounts.
Meta’s defense team spoke during the trial and stated that the allegations that the company favored certain candidates are “false and unfounded.”
“There is no evidence of any unequal treatment by Meta,” the defense stated.
In a document submitted to the court prior to the trial, the company denied the allegations that it distributed biased political content.
According to Meta, its monitoring reports show that third-party studies pointing to alleged bias in the platforms did not take into account differences in the campaigns’ digital strategies or repeated video views.