Demonstrators demand algorithmic transparency as Brazil’s electoral court gives Meta 24 hours to prove equal treatment of presidential campaigns.

---

Hundreds of Brazilians protested outside Meta’s São Paulo offices on Monday, accusing the technology giant of restricting the reach of President Luiz Inácio Lula da Silva’s campaign while boosting far-right candidate Flávio Bolsonaro, six days before the presidential runoff. The demonstration coincided with a court order giving Meta 24 hours to prove it was treating both campaigns equally.

RELATED: Brazilian Court Gives Meta 24 Hours to Prove Equal Treatment of Presidential Campaigns

The protest on Faria Lima Avenue called for an end to what demonstrators described as the suppression of progressive political content. Organizers also demanded transparency in content moderation algorithms, protections for activists and journalists, and compensation for damage to public debate.

The Superior Electoral Court (TSE) imposed the 24-hour deadline amid mounting scrutiny of Meta’s handling of the campaigns. The dispute intensified after internal messages emerged in which company employees acknowledged that Lula’s account had faced restrictions compared with Bolsonaro’s. The messages indicated that Lula’s Instagram posts could not be promoted for nearly 24 hours between Oct. 9 and 10.

“META NO SE META!”

Movimientos brasileños ocupan la sede de la plataforma de redes sociales. pic.twitter.com/wetfUpEryA

— Nacho Lemus (@LemusteleSUR) October 19, 2026

Text Reads: “META DON’T GET INVOLVED!” Brazilian movements occupy the headquarters of the social media platform.

TSE Justice Marco Aurélio Bellizze warned that appeals would not suspend the court’s orders and doubled the daily fine for noncompliance from 500,000 reais to 1 million reais, or about $180,000.

The court also ordered Meta to submit individual reports in Portuguese, explain its recommendation algorithms, provide details on electoral advertising oversight, and identify potential networks of fake accounts and AI-generated images.

“Unilaterally replacing deadlines set by the court amounts to noncompliance, particularly in a process whose effectiveness depends on time,” Bellizze said.

Ver esta publicación en Instagram

Una publicación compartida por teleSUR English (@telesurenglish)

Meta maintains that its content moderation policies apply equally to all political actors. Bolsonaro has also sought to join the proceedings, arguing that his own content has been harmed.

Concerns over digital sovereignty

Protesters argued that the dispute exposed the broader influence of social media platforms over Brazil’s electoral process. They noted that 70% of the Brazilian population uses Instagram to obtain information and accused Meta, owned by Mark Zuckerberg, of wielding opaque power over political visibility.

“We cannot say we have fair elections when a company uses its economic, technical and technological power to tilt public debate toward one side, which is what is happening,” said Dani Silva, executive director of Ctrl+Z, one of the organizations behind the demonstration.

The rally was organized by the Não se Meta coalition, which included the Landless Workers’ Movement (MST), Levantamento da Juventude Popular, Brasil Popular, Article 19, Ctrl+Z, Código No Binário, Diracom, the National Forum for the Democratization of Communication and Sleeping Giants Brazil.

Under the slogan “Meta, stay out of our election,” demonstrators displayed signs featuring Zuckerberg alongside U.S. President Donald Trump and chanted for digital sovereignty and Meta’s exclusion from the electoral process.

Activist Veronyka Gimenes, known as Trava Hacker, described the company’s actions as part of what she called “digital colonialism,” alleging that technology companies seek to influence domestic politics across the Global South.

“Digital sovereignty is no joke; it is something that must be taken very seriously,” she said.

Activist Tiana Cauton urged people to take to the streets to demand the democratization of communications. She also expressed hope that a new presidential term would advance “autonomy through our own open and clean social networks.”

Demonstrators said Meta’s influence over political communication had undermined Brazil’s national sovereignty since the 2018 elections, renewing calls for greater accountability for social media platforms during the electoral process.

The United States has warned the European Union that proposed restrictions on American satellite operators could provoke commercial retaliation against European businesses, escalating a dispute over the future of satellite communications and Europe’s efforts to reduce its dependence on foreign technology.

US Ambassador to the EU Andrew Puzder has criticised plans under consideration in Brussels that would reserve parts of the radio spectrum for European operators, potentially restricting services provided by Elon Musk’s SpaceX and its Starlink satellite network.

According to details of Washington’s objections, the American administration believes the proposed arrangements would discriminate against US companies and undermine competition. Puzder has warned that European businesses could face substantial consequences if the restrictions proceed.

The disagreement comes as Brussels pursues a broader strategy intended to strengthen Europe’s technological independence in satellite communications, cloud computing and artificial intelligence. Washington has increasingly challenged European regulations that it considers detrimental to American technology companies.

A dispute over access to satellite frequencies

At the centre of the disagreement is the allocation of radio frequencies used by satellite communications systems. Access to suitable spectrum is essential for providing reliable services, particularly as operators deploy increasingly large constellations in low Earth orbit.

SpaceX has established a substantial commercial and technological advantage through Starlink, which operates thousands of satellites and provides broadband services to residential, commercial and government customers across numerous countries.

European operators argue that the expansion of American satellite networks could make it difficult for European competitors to secure sufficient spectrum and develop commercially viable services.

Washington takes a different position, warning that preferential treatment for European operators could restrict competition rather than strengthen it.

The precise legal form of the proposed EU restrictions, and whether they will proceed, remain unsettled. No final European prohibition on American satellite services has been announced.

Nevertheless, the dispute raises a question for Brussels: whether measures intended to protect European industrial capacity can be introduced without exposing European exporters and investors to American retaliation.

Europe’s satellite ambitions

The European Commission is investing heavily in IRIS², its secure satellite communications programme, which is intended to provide independent communications capabilities for governments, defence organisations and commercial customers.

Under arrangements confirmed in August, the programme’s principal constellation is planned to comprise 348 satellites operating in low and medium Earth orbit, with initial launches scheduled for 2029.

The system is designed to reduce Europe’s reliance on communications infrastructure controlled by companies or governments outside the EU, particularly during military emergencies, cyber incidents and interruptions to terrestrial networks.

The Commission’s technical programme envisages communications services supporting border management, crisis response, defence and other sensitive government activities.

However, IRIS² is not yet operational, and European commercial operators face significant competition from SpaceX.

Eutelsat, which operates the OneWeb satellite network, is among the European companies positioned to benefit from increased demand for alternatives to Starlink.

Its shares rose sharply on 14 October following reports of restrictions affecting Ukrainian access to certain Starlink services. The market reaction reflected renewed interest in European-controlled satellite communications.

OneWeb cannot simply replace Starlink across all applications. Differences in network architecture, terminal equipment and available capacity complicate any rapid transition.

Ukraine adds a security dimension

The dispute is particularly sensitive because Starlink has become an important part of Ukraine’s communications infrastructure during Russia’s invasion.

Ukrainian forces have relied on satellite connectivity for communications in areas where conventional telecommunications infrastructure has been damaged or destroyed.

The strategic consequences of relying on a commercial provider became more prominent following reports that access to certain Starlink capabilities had been restricted.

For European governments, the episode has reinforced concerns about whether defence communications should depend on technology controlled by a company subject to political and commercial pressures outside Europe.

Yet restricting American participation before European alternatives are fully available could produce its own operational difficulties.

The Commission must therefore distinguish between developing independent European capabilities and limiting access to services that governments, businesses and military organisations currently require.

Another transatlantic regulatory confrontation

The satellite dispute follows disagreements over European regulation of American digital companies, including competition enforcement and restrictions on online platforms.

As EU Today reported in May, the European Commission had already proposed reserving much of the future mobile satellite spectrum for European operators.

Washington’s opposition introduces a different dimension because spectrum allocation affects market access directly.

The American administration is also linking the dispute to broader commercial relations, raising the possibility that measures affecting satellite companies could produce consequences for unrelated European industries.

Brussels has not announced a final decision on the disputed spectrum arrangements, while the United States has not specified which retaliatory measures it would impose.

The immediate issue is therefore regulatory rather than an enacted trade restriction. Whether it develops into a wider confrontation will depend on the Commission’s final proposals and Washington’s willingness to pursue its warning through commercial measures.

In recent days, a Ukrainian drone strike hit Russia’s largest data center, owned by bank and technology company Sberbank. The strike came after Ukraine hit three data centers belonging to the tech giant Yandex, which is often referred to as “Russia’s Google.” After those attacks, Yandex’s traffic dropped 94%. Its users experienced heavy disruption to […]

The post Data centers in the line of fire of Ukraine war appeared first on Asia Times.