Brazil fines Meta $1.3 million over election order violations

Brazil's Superior Electoral Court fined Meta 7.5 million reais for failing to comply with judicial orders during the presidential campaign. The court's ministers voted unanimously to apply the penalty against the company that owns Instagram, Facebook, and WhatsApp.

The fine stems from a lawsuit filed by President Luiz Inacio Lula da Silva's campaign, which accused Meta of interfering in the distribution of political and electoral content during the presidential race between Lula and Flavio Bolsonaro.

“The autos record technical failures recognized by the represented party itself. Beyond them, there are no elements that allow affirming, in summary cognition, the existence of deliberate action to unbalance the election.”

Relator Marco Aurelio Bellizze distinguished between noncompliance with electoral court orders and intentional interference. He said there is no sufficient evidence to conclude that Meta acted deliberately to favor one candidacy.

Bellizze warned that digital platforms exercise informational power over political information circulation and voter will formation through little-transparent algorithmic systems. He called for improved oversight mechanisms for algorithms that determine political content circulation on social networks.

The court did not find proof of deliberate balancing of the dispute, noting such a conclusion would require robust evidence of subjective elements through exhaustive cognition in an appropriate procedural route.

DT Next reported separately that allegations have mounted that Big Tech companies, especially Meta, interfered in Brazil's 2026 electoral process to undermine President Lula's reelection. The outlet cited its NetLab UFRJ research group, which created a Big Tech Observatory during the campaign to monitor algorithmic recommendation and political advertising.

DT Next also noted that Meta has shown neither willingness nor diligence to effectively fight disinformation and fraudulent ads despite lawsuits, administrative actions, civil society complaints, and press reports against the company.