MercoPress. South Atlantic News Agency

De Moraes says there is no such thing as self-regulation of social media

Social media are “a monetized business,” De Moraes argued

Brazil's Supreme Federal Court Justice Alexandre De Moraes said Thursday that the Jan. 8, 2023, uprising in the country's capital proved that self-regulation of social networks does not work as its defenders claim it does. The magistrate spoke of the system's “bankruptcy” as the STF resumed reviewing the liability of companies operating social networks for the content posted by users, Agencia Brasil reported.

De Moraes highlighted that social media profiles broadcast the attacks on the STF headquarters, Congress, and the Planalto Palace live, which was monetized. “It is practically impossible to defend, after January 8, that the self-regulation system works. Total and absolute bankruptcy. Instrumentalization and part of connivance,” said De Moraes, who is also the case rapporteur. He also insisted that the invasion was organized by social networks.

“Everything was organized by the networks. On that day, the Three Powers Square was invaded, the Supreme Court was destroyed, Congress was destroyed, the Planalto Palace... People making videos, posting them on social media, calling for more people to destroy, and the social media didn't remove anything. Why? Like after like, a monetized business system,” he went on.

Justice Cármen Lúcia also recalled that the Nov. 13 attack by a suicide bomber in front of the STF was planned by the networks. “That episode was also on the networks, the post of the person attacking the Supreme Court, saying he was going to do something and we couldn't see it, we couldn't see it, we couldn't see anything. What we had that night was a tragic act,” she said.

The STF plenary is judging four cases that discuss the constitutionality of article 19 of the Marco Civil da Internet, which established the rights and duties for the use of the internet in Brazil, whereby “in order to ensure freedom of expression and prevent censorship”, platforms can only be held responsible for illegal posts made by their users if, after a court order, they do not take steps to remove the content.

Hence, the matter remains whether these applications are held accountable and sentenced to pay compensation for moral damages for not removing any content deemed offensive before a court's order. De Moraes said the platforms were reluctant in this regard.

Whatever the STF rules will become case law for proceedings of this sort in lower courts. At least 345 cases are pending a ruling.