Brasilia:Meta has refuted allegations of bias towards any presidential candidate in Brazil's upcoming runoff election. The company informed the electoral court that it has implemented mandatory human reviews of automated restrictions on campaign advertising accounts.
According to Anadolu Agency – English, Meta's response was prompted by a complaint from Lula's Workers' Party (PT), which accused the company of restricting its campaign content while allegedly favoring Flavio Bolsonaro. Brazilian news outlet UOL reported this accusation against Meta.
Meta clarified that restrictions on campaign advertising accounts will now undergo mandatory human reviews within two hours, in preparation for the runoff this Sunday. The company emphasized that it has not been partial to any candidate and requested the court to refrain from imposing fines, asserting compliance with court orders in good faith.
This development follows measures instituted by the Superior Electoral Court (TSE) to ensure equal treatment of all candidates. Concerns had been raised about Meta's artificial intelligence tools' capability to generate election-related content about the candidates, prompting the court to mandate adjustments.
In its efforts to maintain integrity, Meta reviewed 1,204 posts flagged for AI-generated content, removing or blocking 720 posts for violating electoral labeling rules. Among the remaining posts, 270 were correctly labeled, and 214 were determined to be non-electoral.
Additionally, Meta has introduced a whitelist policy restricting paid political advertising in Brazil to candidates, parties, coalitions, and federations registered with the TSE. The company also cited Instagram's technical limitations, which necessitated disabling recommendations for entire collaborative posts instead of targeting a candidate's profile.
Meta has requested an urgent meeting with the TSE to address ongoing technical issues before the scheduled runoff on October 25. The controversy centers on concerns that Meta's content moderation might impact electoral fairness, which the company firmly denies.