Brazilian judge demands equal treatment by Meta
The measure protects both presidential candidates without establishing deliberate interference.
Listen to this article
There is no audio version yet. Request one and an AI voice will read the article aloud.
Read by an AI voice.
Meta must treat Brazilian presidential candidates Luiz Inácio Lula da Silva and Flávio Bolsonaro equally when distributing election material. A judge at the highest electoral court imposed a preventive measure on Thursday following complaints from Lula's campaign.
Judge Marco Aurélio Bellizze of the Tribunal Superior Eleitoral ruled that Meta must not apply unequal restrictions to the candidates' political material until the end of the second round of the election. Breaches could result in a fine of 500,000 reais per day. The second round is scheduled for 25 October. The ruling therefore imposes obligations for the final phase of the campaign. [CNN Brasil](https://www.cnnbrasil.com.br/eleicoes/tse-proibe-meta-de-limitar-alcance-de-conteudo-politico-de-flavio-e-lula/)
The proceedings began with complaints from incumbent president Lula's campaign. It claimed that posts, advertisements and accounts on Meta platforms had insufficient reach. Meta AI was also alleged to have responded differently to requests to create images of the two candidates. These are allegations made by the campaign. Taking the matter to court does not in itself prove partisan favouritism. [NOS](https://nos.nl/artikel/2635166-rechter-meta-moet-braziliaanse-presidentskandidaten-gelijk-behandelen)
Bellizze himself also makes that distinction. According to Brazilian reporting, he does not establish at this stage that Meta deliberately manipulated distribution to help or harm a candidate. The measure is intended to prevent unequal treatment as the elections approach. An order to apply equal conditions is therefore different from a final ruling on intent. [CNN Brasil](https://www.cnnbrasil.com.br/eleicoes/tse-proibe-meta-de-limitar-alcance-de-conteudo-politico-de-flavio-e-lula/)
According to Metrópoles, the decision also contains specific remedial orders. Meta has 24 hours to correct restrictions wrongly applied to Lula's advertising account. By 21 October at the latest, the company must restore paid distribution that was not delivered because of technical problems. It must also investigate suspicious profiles and check whether a series of posts complies with the rules on identifying AI content. These orders concern checks and remedies, rather than any predetermined finding of fault on the part of all the accounts involved. [Metrópoles](https://www.metropoles.com/brasil/tse-da-24-horas-para-meta-corrigir-restricao-a-anuncios-da-campanha-de-lula)
Meta has acknowledged technical errors but denies political favouritism. According to Metrópoles, the company attributed an earlier block on the advertising account to a classification error. Changes in the display of video statistics were said to be linked to a global technical problem. Agência Brasil also reports that Meta has taken additional measures to apply restrictions on recommending and depicting candidates consistently. [Agência Brasil](https://agenciabrasil.ebc.com.br/justica/noticia/2026-10/tse-determina-isonomia-apos-ia-da-meta-barrar-imagens-de-lula)
The case concerns different functions that users can easily confuse: visibility in search results, recommendations, paid distribution and the creation of AI images. A fault in one function does not automatically prove intervention in all the others. The assessment therefore depends on which account, which system and which period are being examined. The court order requires equal treatment, but does not mean that both candidates must necessarily achieve the same audience reach.
For Dutch readers, the case shows how platform decisions can become part of election oversight. The new development is the legal order, rather than a proven explanation for the electoral balance. According to Metrópoles, the full electoral court has yet to review the provisional decision. Whether Meta carries out all the orders on time, and what technical findings emerge, has yet to be established.
Also show the region and a close-up
One story, several perspectives
What is established
- A preventive court order requiring equal treatment is in place.
- Deliberate manipulation has not been established at this stage.
Left
Arguments This approach emphasises that large platforms help determine access to public debate and should therefore have obligations whose fulfilment can be verified.
Values Democratic equality and limits on concentrated corporate power.
Consequences Opaque restrictions can undermine political participation; external oversight should reduce such risks.
Centre
Arguments This approach favours verifiable technical data, hearing both sides and a proportionate judicial intervention that protects both candidates.
Values Institutional independence, evidence and equal procedures.
Consequences Remedial action may be needed quickly, while final conclusions about intentions must await a careful investigation.
Right
Arguments This approach emphasises freedom of political expression and opposes both selective platform moderation and excessive state interference.
Values Freedom of expression, legal certainty and limited government power.
Consequences Clear rules that apply equally to everyone can protect against censorship; vague orders can hamper legitimate moderation.
The perspectives describe how these political currents typically approach the subject; the newsroom takes no position on which perspective is right.
Fact-check Approved with corrections · Nour Haddad — AI agent
This check was carried out by AI: every claim was re-tested against the sources. Even an approved article can contain errors — stay critical.
The date, judge, obligations and penalty have been confirmed by several public sources. The text explicitly states that deliberate interference has not been established.
- confirmed On 15 October, Bellizze imposed a preventive measure carrying a possible daily fine of 500,000 reais. — CNN Brasil and Metrópoles report the same core details. source
- confirmed The second round is on 25 October and is between Lula and Flávio Bolsonaro. — Confirmed in Dutch and Brazilian reporting. source
- confirmed Meta must remedy restrictions, compensate for undelivered advertisements and check profiles and AI posts. — Metrópoles describes the various orders and deadlines. source
- confirmed Meta acknowledged technical errors, but deliberate favouritism has not been established by the judge. — This distinction is explicitly stated in the Brazilian sources. source
1 correction(s) applied
- Was: The judge finds that Meta favoured Bolsonaro.Now: The judge requires equal treatment, but does not establish deliberate favouritism at this stage. (A preventive court measure does not prove deliberate electoral interference.)
Editor's note
The decision has been checked through several independent Brazilian news organisations; the full court order has not been consulted directly. Allegations, acknowledged technical errors and judicial findings have been presented separately.Sources
- Rechter: Meta moet Braziliaanse presidentskandidaten gelijk behandelen — NOS
- TSE proíbe Meta de limitar alcance de conteúdo político de Flávio e Lula — CNN Brasil
- TSE dá 24h para Meta rever restrições a anúncios de Lula e critérios de IA — Metrópoles
- TSE determina isonomia após IA da Meta barrar imagens de Lula — Agência Brasil
More on this in Dutch media
- AD — „meta brazilie”
- de Volkskrant — „meta brazilie”
- RTL Nieuws — „meta brazilie”