Brazil Gives Meta 24 Hours to Prove Equal Treatment of Lula and Bolsonaro Ahead of Presidential Runoff
By Shahnoor Saqib — SCN NEWS
BRASÍLIA, Brazil — Brazil's top electoral court has given Meta 24 hours to demonstrate that its social media platforms treat presidential candidates Luiz Inácio Lula da Silva and Flávio Bolsonaro equally, doubling a potential daily fine to 1 million reais ($200,000) for failing to comply with an earlier judicial order. The decision comes six days before Brazil's October 25 presidential runoff and intensifies scrutiny of how Facebook, Instagram and WhatsApp distribute political content, display campaign advertising and apply artificial intelligence restrictions during the election.
Justice Marco Aurélio Bellizze of the Superior Electoral Court, known as the TSE, ordered the technology company to provide evidence that it had implemented measures required by a previous ruling. The court had initially allowed Meta 72 hours to demonstrate compliance, but the deadline passed without the information being supplied to the court's satisfaction. The judge subsequently increased the daily penalty from 500,000 reais to 1 million reais and imposed a new 24-hour deadline.
The dispute originated with complaints from Lula's re-election campaign, which alleged that Meta's systems had reduced the visibility of the president's political content while allowing material supporting his opponent to circulate more widely. The campaign raised concerns about restrictions on Instagram accounts, paid advertising, search visibility and the treatment of political material by Meta's artificial intelligence tools. It argued that inconsistent enforcement could affect voters' access to campaign information during the final weeks of the election.
Flávio Bolsonaro's campaign has also filed a complaint with the electoral court alleging that Meta's platforms disadvantaged its political content. The competing complaints have placed the company under pressure to explain how its recommendation systems and moderation procedures operate across both campaigns, rather than addressing the allegations of only one political group.
In its latest order, the court demanded information about the systems used to recommend political posts, data showing the reach of advertisements associated with both presidential candidates and investigations into potentially inauthentic networks of social media accounts. The judge also requested information about content that should be identified as artificially generated or manipulated. The requirements seek to establish whether the company is applying consistent procedures and complying with electoral rules governing campaign communications.
The new deadline follows a ruling last week requiring Meta to ensure equal treatment of the presidential campaigns. On October 16, the electoral court upheld the earlier order, which restricted measures that could create an unjustified imbalance in the distribution of political material. The decision also addressed the application of artificial intelligence tools to the candidates, following complaints that requests involving their names or campaign imagery had produced inconsistent results.
Meta has denied manipulating its platforms to benefit either candidate. In a public statement issued on October 16, the company said its systems do not classify or distribute content according to political ideology and that its policies apply equally across political parties. Meta acknowledged that Lula's campaign advertising account had been mistakenly disabled for slightly more than an hour in September, but said the problem resulted from an automated fraud-prevention process rather than political considerations.
The company also said that some reported differences involving artificial intelligence image generation resulted from technical limitations and restrictions introduced to comply with Brazilian election rules. Meta maintained that it had taken steps to prevent its tools from recommending candidates or generating certain campaign imagery during the electoral period. It said the restrictions were intended to apply to both candidates and that it had submitted technical explanations to the court.
The court proceedings have not established that Meta deliberately manipulated its algorithms to influence the election. The judicial dispute instead concerns whether the company has complied with orders requiring transparency and consistent treatment, and whether its explanations adequately address the complaints submitted by the campaigns.
The case comes at a sensitive point in Brazil's presidential election. Lula, the incumbent president representing the Workers' Party, faces Senator Flávio Bolsonaro, the son of former President Jair Bolsonaro, in the second round of voting on Sunday. In the October 4 first round, Flávio Bolsonaro received approximately 47% of the vote compared with about 45% for Lula, leaving neither candidate with the majority required to win outright.
Social media platforms play a major role in Brazilian political communication, providing channels for candidates to distribute messages, reach supporters and purchase advertising. Decisions about whether posts are recommended, restricted or removed can affect the visibility of campaign material. Electoral authorities are therefore examining not only the companies' public policies but also the technical systems used to enforce them.
Brazilian digital rights organizations have separately called for greater transparency over content moderation, account restrictions and the handling of political advertising. Some groups have supported allegations that Meta's systems treated the presidential campaigns inconsistently, although those assessments remain distinct from any final judicial determination of intentional discrimination. The organizations have urged platforms to provide clearer explanations of how political content is reviewed and how users can challenge restrictions.
The dispute reflects broader questions facing election regulators about the role of large technology companies in political debate. Automated recommendation systems can influence which posts users encounter, while artificial intelligence tools introduce additional challenges involving synthetic images, impersonation and misleading political material. Courts seeking to enforce equal treatment must distinguish between technical errors, ordinary moderation decisions and deliberate interference, a distinction that often requires access to data controlled by the platforms themselves.
Meta now faces a short deadline to provide the requested evidence or risk the increased daily financial penalty for noncompliance. The court's order does not declare either candidate the victim of proven intentional bias, nor does it determine the outcome of the election. It places the immediate responsibility on the company to demonstrate that its systems and campaign-related procedures comply with Brazil's electoral requirements before voters return to the polls on October 25.