Brazil’s Solicitor General has criticised Meta’s hate speech policy changes, while the company claims it aims to secure greater freedom of expression. Brazil will hold a public hearing this week to discuss this issue.
Meta has told the Brazilian government that it doesn't yet have to worry about the end of fact checkers in its country because it is only removing them in the United States for the time being. Brazilian publication Globo reports that Meta,
Former President Jair Bolsonaro, who is facing criminal charges, has been invited to Trump's inauguration even though Brazil's government has confiscated his passport
Brazil on Friday gave social media giant Meta 72 hours to explain its fact-checking policy for the country, and how it plans to protect “fundamental rights” on its platforms.
In a statement to Brazil’s Supreme Federal Court (STF) in November of last year, Meta used a tone opposite to that now employed by Mark Zuckerberg, the company’s CEO, when discussing its moderation activities.
Meta told Brazil it would not yet end fact-checks outside the US, but its attempts to clarify its new social media policies fell flat Tuesday as the Latin American nation slammed measures which promote a "digital Wild West.
Justices and advisors of the Supreme Federal Court (STF) are cautiously observing Meta's shift towards a model resembling X (formerly Twitter). At the same time, members of the court are downplaying CEO Mark Zuckerberg's remark that Latin American courts issue decisions in secrecy.
Meta wants to control content on its platforms less in future – Brazil's government wants to know by Monday how this fits in with its laws.
In today’s edition of the Capitals, find out more about the EU's lukewarm response to X owner Elon Musk and Meta boss Mark Zuckerberg, and so much more.
Brazil’s government will give Meta until Monday to explain the changes to its fact-checking program, Solicitor General Jorge Messias said on Friday.
Meta’s announcement has sparked alarm in Brazil, where the government sees Meta’s policy changes as a potential threat to public discourse. Zuckerberg justified the change by criticising the bias he s