As Brazil prepares for a decisive presidential runoff on October 25 the nation’s highest electoral tribunal delivered a landmark ruling against the tech conglomerate Meta. The decision follows a complaint lodged by the incumbent president Luiz Inácio Lula da Silva who accused the company of skewing its algorithms to benefit his rival, Senator Flávio Bolsonaro. The judgment obliges Meta to apply identical distribution criteria to content posted by both camps on its dominant services – InstagramFacebook and WhatsApp – while imposing a steep daily penalty for any breach.
Judge’s order and the financial stake
Justice Marco Aurelio Bellizze authored the ruling, explicitly prohibiting the platform from reducing the reach of political posts, limiting search results or removing material in a way that creates an imbalance between the two candidates. He also mandated that Meta’s artificial intelligence tools employ the same evaluation metrics for both campaigns. Failure to comply triggers a fine of 500,000 reais per day – roughly $98,000 – a sum that could quickly mount if the company does not adjust its systems.
Allegations raised by the Lula campaign
The petition submitted by Lula’s legal team highlighted several concrete anomalies. Posts linked to the president’s official accounts allegedly appeared without the usual share button, suffered reduced visibility, and lacked reaction options such as likes or audio playback. In contrast, accounts associated with Flávio Bolsonaro reportedly enjoyed artificially boosted reach, with engagement metrics rivaling those of global celebrities. The campaign further claimed that Meta’s “Meta AI” feature on WhatsApp failed to generate campaign-related images for Lula, while easily producing similar content for Bolsonaro supporters, suggesting a selective AI-driven bias.
Meta’s response and technical defenses
Meta declined to comment on the specifics of the ruling but reaffirmed its commitment to Brazilian electoral law. The company acknowledged that technical glitches occasionally affect user accounts worldwide and insisted that any disruptions are unrelated to political intent. In a statement to the court, Meta reiterated that it “rejects accusations of being skewed toward any candidate” and maintains that its platforms operate under a neutral policy framework.
Potential impact on the runoff
If Meta complies promptly, both campaigns will receive comparable exposure, allowing voters to encounter each side’s messaging without algorithmic interference. Conversely, persistent non-compliance could result in daily fines accumulating into millions of reais, exerting financial pressure on the corporation while drawing heightened scrutiny to social-media influence in Brazil’s democratic process. The outcome of this legal clash may set a precedent for how global tech firms handle political content in tightly contested elections.
