The bill’s proponents hailed it as a vital defense against “fake news” and online extremism. Lula’s left-wing government and various civil society groups support the bill, while tech companies, Evangelical Christian lawmakers, and Bolsonaro supporters oppose it. They allege that the bill would create an Orwellian “Truth Ministry” to censor citizens’ views. The measure has made headlines as the government and courts have hit back at Google and Telegram for using their platforms to oppose it.
The Bill’s Provisions
The bill aims to increase transparency and make companies adopt rules to combat illegal content in seven areas: attacks against democracy and the rule of law, children, the health system, women, racism, terrorism, and incitement to suicide or self-harm. It is based partly on the European Union’s recently adopted Digital Services Act and would apply to all social networks, search engines, and instant messaging apps with more than 10 million monthly users. It would require them to hire external auditors. Penalties would range from warnings to temporary suspensions or fines of up to 10 percent of revenue.
The Controversy
Telegram sent a message to its more than 40 million users in Brazil warning that Congress “is about to pass a law that will end free speech” and “give the government censorship powers.” Google’s public policy director for Brazil, Marcelo Lacerda, wrote that “companies would have to remove legitimate views, resulting in excessive blockage and a new kind of censorship.” The current version of the legislation leaves a question mark over how it will be enforced and experts warn that it could lead to political, rather than technical, oversight. Pablo Ortellado, a public policy expert at the University of Sao Paulo, warned that this is dangerous.
The bill continues to be a contentious issue in Brazil, with supporters and opponents deeply divided. While it aims to combat disinformation and illegal content, critics argue that it could lead to censorship and the stifling of free speech. As the government and courts continue to debate the measure, its final provisions and impact remain uncertain.
This website uses cookies so that we can provide you with the best user experience possible. Cookie information is stored in your browser and performs functions such as recognising you when you return to our website and helping our team to understand which sections of the website you find most interesting and useful.
Strictly Necessary Cookies
Strictly Necessary Cookie should be enabled at all times so that we can save your preferences for cookie settings.
If you disable this cookie, we will not be able to save your preferences. This means that every time you visit this website you will need to enable or disable cookies again.
Leave a Reply