Brazil Takes on Big Tech

From Brazil to Germany, Big Tech’s interference in politics has been a cause for concern. In the Latin American country, Elon Musk, the owner of X (formerly Twitter), has challenged the Brazilian Supreme Court’s (STF) orders to block accounts linked to networks that spread disinformation and attack democracy. Amidst this conflict, the billionaire actually suggested that Brazilians should violate court orders, instigating the battle between the platform and the country’s courts.

In Germany, Musk exposed his alignment with the extreme right by endorsing the Alternative für Deutschland (AfD), attending political events, and normalizing extremist discourse.

In the United States, members of the “tech elite” had front-row seats at Donald Trump’s inauguration in January 2025, where gestures made by Musk resembling the Nazi salute sparked international outrage and caused increasing apprehension over the influence Big Tech has in the rise of authoritarian governments.

That same month, Mark Zuckerberg, CEO of Meta — the company that owns Facebook, Instagram, and WhatsApp — said he will work with the US president to push back on countries that aim to implement regulations for the digital environment, and he insinuated that there are “secret courts” in Latin America. In Brazil, his statement was understood as an allusion to the Supreme Court, which has been ruling on cases of disinformation involving digital platforms in the country.

Fertile Ground for Disinformation

Social media has become fertile ground for disinformation. Studies show that sectors aligned with the far right have been benefiting from these platforms, turning them into spaces that create and empower “information bubbles” — environments where users mostly interact with content that reiterates their convictions and reduces the possibilities of plural conversations.

This phenomenon is aggravated by platforms’ algorithms, which prioritize content with high potential for engagement. Because false and sensationalistic news tends to spark emotions like fear or outrage, it tends to spread faster than informative content. This is what research conducted at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology (MIT) shows. The study revealed that popular fake news reaches up to 100,000 people, while true news rarely reaches 1,000 individuals. This gap shows the role of algorithms in amplifying polarizing content, making the platforms key pieces in the disinformation ecosystem.

This cycle creates a favourable environment for manipulation of the public opinion, with direct impacts on democratic processes. Research from the DataSenado Institute shows that 81 percent of Brazilians believe that fake news may significantly affect election results, which demonstrates how necessary it is to have mechanisms in place to fight disinformation.

Fake News: A Threat to the Election Process

The impact of fake news on democracy is not limited to people’s perception of it. It has become very concrete in Brazil’s latest elections. A study by Margareth Vetis Zaganelli and Simone Guerra Maziero published on Revista Eletrônica de Direito Eleitoral e Sistema Político shows that the spread of disinformation about the elections became a growing issue as of 2018 and became an instrument of political manipulation.

The 2018 and 2022 elections in Brazil were marked by the use of fake news to delegitimize the electoral system. Pieces of false information about the electronic voting machines were widely shared, feeding into a feeling of distrust in Brazil’s Superior Electoral Court (TSE). Manipulated videos, memes, and audio messages spread massively among apps including WhatsApp and Telegram, creating an environment of doubt and instability.

A study conducted by Agência Lupa in partnership with the University of São Paulo (USP) and the Federal University of Minas Gerais (UFMG) looked into 347 WhatsApp public groups during the second round of the 2018 elections and revealed that, among the 50 most shared images, only four were true. This shows how manipulated and decontextualized content has been amplified, directly influencing the democratic process and deepening political polarization.

The Role of Algorithms and Big Tech’s Business Model

Big digital platforms like Facebook, WhatsApp, Telegram, and X (formerly Twitter) not only make the spread of disinformation easier—they also profit from it. These companies’ business model is based on the “attention economy”, in which content that sparks strong emotional reactions — like fear, anger, or outrage — are prioritized to maximize the time users spend on the platforms.

Sérgio Amadeu, a professor at the Federal University of the ABC Region (UFABC), published the article Platforms Become Geopolitical Structures for the Far Right at Brasil de Fato arguing that social media put Joseph Goebbels’ principle into practice: “a post becomes true if it is repeated a million times”. Amadeu explains that digital platforms operate by collecting massive data about users, which allows them to accurately target polarizing content to maximize engagement. This vicious cycle favours political radicalization and makes fighting disinformation more difficult.

Conflicts between Big Tech and Democratic Institutions in Brazil

Big Tech’s influence on politics is not limited to the spread of disinformation during elections. These platforms have also become a key arena in undemocratic demonstrations. The most symbolic episode regarding this strategic use by the far right in Brazil happened on 8 January 2023, when supporters of the former president Jair Bolsonaro launched an assault against the Three Branches Plaza, in Brasília, Brazil’s capital.

The clash between the Brazilian Supreme Court and the platform X has become one of the biggest conflicts between a Big Tech company and the Brazilian state.

Investigations revealed that apps like Telegram and WhatsApp were used to coordinate the raids, while X (formerly Twitter) served as a space to spread extremist messages and sedition. According to Zaganelli and Maziero, “viral disinformation on social media not only shapes public opinion — it encourages narratives that challenge the legitimacy of democratic institutions.”

The Final Report of the Joint Parliamentary Committee of Inquiry (CPMI) on 8 January 2023 reiterates this analysis as it describes how digital militia groups were employed to spread fear, discredit opponents, and attack the electoral system. The document underscores that “modern coups (...) do not use tanks, corporals, or soldiers.” The attacks employed a hybrid war strategy, combining widespread disinformation and political and social actions. This model, leveraged by social media, has intensified radicalization and encouraged violent actions against democratic institutions.

STF v. X: The Crisis between Brazil’s Courts and Big Tech

The clash between the Brazilian Supreme Court (STF) and the platform X has become one of the biggest conflicts between a Big Tech company and the Brazilian state. The conflict started in previous investigations on disinformation networks, but escalated after the 8 January 2023 attacks, when groups of Bolsonaro supporters tried to overthrow the democratically elected government.

After the attacks on the headquarters of the three branches of government in Brasília, the Supreme Court ordered the blocking of accounts of those involved in the spread of fake news and incitement to violence against democratic institutions. Those accounts were suspended based on ongoing investigations, including the Inquiry on Digital Militia Groups (Inq. 4,874) and the Inquiry on Fake News (Inq. 4,781), which investigate the use of social media for organizing attacks on the democratic regime.

Big Tech’s influence on politics and support for the global far right has escalated in recent years.

In April 2024, the conflict escalated when X owner Elon Musk publicly attacked the STF and threatened to reactivate the court-ordered blocked accounts. Musk accused Supreme Court Justice Alexandre de Moraes of censoring the platform and suggested that Brazilian users used virtual private networks (VPNs) to cheat the court-ordered restrictions.

Moraes responded by including Musk as a person of interest in the Inquiry on Digital Militia Groups, to investigate him for obstruction of justice, incitement to crime, and non-compliance with court orders. The Brazilian Supreme Court Justice also launched a new inquiry specifically to investigate Musk’s conduct.

The case reached a pinnacle on 30 August 2024, when Moraes imposed a block of X in Brazil. The Supreme Court’s first panel unanimously ruled in favour of his decision on 2 September, after exhausting all attempts to make the platform comply with the court’s orders and pay the court-ordered fines.

The STF allowed X to resume operations in Brazil on 8 October 2024, after the company complied with court orders. The conditions established for the company to resume its services included:

• blocking profiles that were spreading fake news and inciting violence
• appointing a legal representative in Brazil, a mandatory requirement for foreign companies operating in the country
• paying the court-ordered fines in full, a total of R$ 28.6 million (roughly 4.8 million US dollars).

Big Tech’s Influence on the Global Conversation around Social Media

Big Tech’s influence on politics and support for the global far right has escalated in recent years, and Elon Musk has been playing an active role in this. In December 2024, he publicly declared his endorsement of the German far-right party Alternative for Germany (AfD), writing on X that “Only the AfD can save Germany.” Shortly after that, in January 2025, Musk made a video appearance at an AfD campaign event where he encouraged Germans to “move beyond past guilt” and be proud of their culture.

In the United States, Donald Trump’s inauguration in January 2025 made the connection between Big Tech and digital radicalization even more apparent. CEOs and Big Tech tycoons had front row seats at the ceremony, consolidating their close relationship with the new administration. Elon Musk sparked a huge backlash after making gestures at the event that resemble the Nazi salute, leading to a “horror show” that quickly went viral on social media.

“Secret Courts” in Latin America

Claiming to be facing “social media censorship”, Meta has announced it will join forces with Trump to pressure countries that are aiming to implement regulations for the digital environment in their regions. “We're going to work with President Trump to push back on governments around the world that are going after American companies”, Zuckerberg said. In his words, “The only way that we can push back on this global trend is with the support of the U.S. government.” And he believes that Europe is “institutionalizing censorship” and that Latin American countries have “secret courts that can order companies to silently remove content”.

While Zuckerberg did not specifically mention the STF, members of the Brazilian government understood his statement as criticism of the Supreme Court’s rulings involving the removal of content and moderation on digital platforms.

End of Moderation: An Invitation to Hate Speech

Zuckerberg’s declarations were made during the announcement of the end of Meta’s fact-checking program and its replacement with a “community notes” system, similar to the one adopted by Elon Musk on X (formerly Twitter). The decision sparked criticism from specialists and organizations, which raise concerns about the challenges facing platforms in the fight against disinformation amid an already polarized environment.

Responding to the declarations of Meta’s CEO, the Secretary for Digital Policy of the Department of Communications of Brazil’s Presidential Office, João Brant, posted on LinkedIn a critique of the end of professional fact-checking: “It is an invitation for far-right activism to increase its use of these networking sites as platforms for their political actions”, adding that “Facebook and Instagram will become platforms that will exclusively favour individual freedom of expression over all other individual and collective rights.”

The mobilization of progressive sectors and the call for a legal framework for digital platforms are fundamental steps to restore the balance in the public arena and protect democracy.

Zuckerberg’s announcement sparked strong reaction from Brazilian institutions including the Federal Prosecutor’s Office (MPF) and the Attorney General’s Office (AGU), which asked Meta for explanations about content moderation in the country. A few days later, Meta informed that it will maintain its fact-checking program in Brazil, but it will shut it down in the US. It also informed that the company implemented changes to its Policy on Hateful Conduct, which led to concerns in the government.

The AGU, in face of this fact, called for a public hearing in Brasília to discuss digital platforms’ new content moderation policies. According to the AGU, 45 agents from institutions working with the topic were invited to attend the hearing, including digital platform representatives, specialists, fact-checking agencies, scholars, and civil society organizations. Digital platforms were invited, but did not attend.

The public hearing underscored the need for Big Tech regulation to prevent abusive practices, ensure transparency in content moderation, and protect users’ fundamental rights. Specialists argued that the lack of clear rules favours disinformation, hate speech, and the commercial exploitation of users.

Advocating for Regulation of Digital Platforms

Left-wing parties, progressive sectors of society, social movements, and civil society organizations advocate the creation of a legal framework to make platforms more transparent, hold companies accountable for pushing content, and create effective mechanisms to fight the spread of fake news.

“We must always reiterate that the promotion of information integrity is not censorship, and democratic regulation is not an illegitimate restriction of freedom of speech. And we must be brave to go beyond what Europe has been able to do with the DSA [Digital Services Act]”, Bia Barbosa, a representative of the organization Reporters Without Borders, said during the public hearing.

Regulating Big Tech: A Fundamental Step to Stop the Far Right

Big Tech’s influence on Brazilian and global democracy clearly shows the key role these companies play in spreading disinformation and political radicalization. Their platforms’ business model, based on engagement and prioritization of polarizing content, directly favours the far right, creating a digital environment that allows manipulation of public opinion and democratic backsliding.

In Brazil, the impacts of this phenomenon became apparent in the latest elections and in events such as the 8 January 2023 attacks, showing how disinformation has become a strategic instrument for authoritarian movements. The battle between governments and Big Tech, exposed during the STF v. X case, increasingly shows the pressing need for regulation to prevent these companies from continuing to operate with no transparency and no effective accountability mechanisms.

The mobilization of progressive sectors and the call for a legal framework for digital platforms are fundamental steps to restore the balance in the public arena and protect democracy. The challenge, however, lies in facing Big Tech’s powerful lobby, as they use their global influence to try to stop any attempts to implement regulations.

Ensuring transparency, accountability, and justice in content moderation is crucial to stop the logic of profit-making from taking precedence over information integrity and society’s right to a democratic and plural digital environment. I close this piece quoting a reflection by the philosophy professor Isabel Loureiro at the “Socialism or Barbarism” class from the course “The Revolutionary Legacy of Rosa Luxemburg”.

Translated by Aline Scátola