The civil society perspective on misinformation and digital platform regulation
Organizations warn about the impact of misinformation and new content moderation rules in digital platforms, highlighting ways in which digital security and democracy are at risk
Foto: Manjunath KIRAN / AFP
Increased misinformation in digital environments and the growing power of major platforms are rekindling discussions on the need to regulate this sector. Experts and civil society organizations warn that the protection of fundamental rights and historically vulnerable groups should be at the forefront of these conversations.
Recent changes in Meta’s content moderation rules have elicited reactions from over 180 Brazilian entities, including Conectas Direitos Humans, all of which have published a statement of repudiation. For these organizations, the company’s new policy poses risks to digital security and human rights.
The topic was also discussed in a public hearing organized by the Brazilian Attorney General’s Office (AGU, acronym in Portuguese), which took place at the start of the year and gathered multiple perspectives on the impacts of these developments, particularly for the most vulnerable populations. Participating entities stated their concern with weaker mechanisms when it comes to addressing hate speech and misinformation, in addition to the lack of transparency in platform decisions.
Read more
Impact of misinformation on marginalized groups
Currently, content moderation policies – or lack thereof – have a disproportionate impact on groups that are already historically and socially vulnerable, which increases the hardships faced in their daily struggles, particularly when it comes to matters involving gender, sexuality, and race.
During the hearing held by the AGU, representatives of multiple civil society organizations came forward to state their visions on the topic.
Internetlab pointed to how women, people of African descent and the LGBTQIA+ community are subject to attacks and hate speech online. During the Brazilian 2024 elections, for instance, though they accounted for 15% of candidates, women were the target of 68% of offenses. The organization emphasized that the opaqueness of content moderation policies may perpetuate silencing and reinforce the exclusion of given groups from the public sphere.
Agência Pública stated that “one cannot even file a complaint before Procon [the Brazilian consumer protection agency]” regarding moderation flaws, underscoring the disproportionate impact that journalists face when dispelling misinformation peddled in these platforms.
In its statements, Artigo 19 brought forth the “attempt at corporate resistance of big techs when faced with democratic control”, expressing that “one must emphasize that Meta’s moderation is not enough, since it often blocks content from historically silenced groups”. The organization further posited that discussions on content handling by these companies is often more connected to economic interests than an authentic defense of freedom of expression.
Associação Nacional de Travestis e Transexuais (Antra, the Brazilian Association of Transvestites and Transexuals) highlighted that tech companies “use people’s data, including sensitive data, to promote personalized ads”, reinforcing how platforms engage in abusive conduct. This process feeds systematic misinformation campaigns, with consequences that transcend the digital space, moving the dangerous realities of online hate speech to physical threats expressed in public.
Democracia em Xeque, in turn, mentioned “the losses that this lack of moderation and regulation cause not only for individual and collective rights, but also for public policies”. The institute underlined the existence of economic interests, from which “platforms pursue profit and influence through political pressure”.
Sleeping Giants, highlighted that “only through transparency mechanisms one may know what, how, when and where moderation occurs”. The group also mentioned the negative impacts of the new Meta policies, particularly for the LGBTI+ population, “when [Meta] authorizes discourse associating sexual orientation and gender identity to mental illness”.
Coordenação das Organizações Indígenas da Amazônia Brasileira (COIAB, the Coordination of Indigenous Organizations of the Brazilian Amazon) acknowledged that social media is essential for the communication of indigenous peoples and warned: “with Meta’s policy shifts, we believe that violence will increase even further, and that we will experience growing misinformation in these spaces”, particularly considering what was experienced during the Covid-19 pandemic.
Instituto Alana underscored that moderation is “not just a necessity, but a constitutional duty”, recalling that Brazil already has legal grounds to hold companies accountable for actions or omissions.
Conectas and Artigo 19 bring a warning to the UN on misinformation
The spread of misinformation, hate speech, and online harassment has jeopardized the integrity of electoral processes and the right to vote, particularly for historically marginalized groups. This was the warning offered by Conectas DIreitos Humanos and Artigo 19 in a document sent to the UN Rapporteurship on Freedom of Opinion and Expression.
The report highlights how these phenomena affect political participation and public living, in addition to shedding light on the need for regulation of the business model of major digital platforms. The organizations recommend measures that encourage a more plural information ecosystem aligned with human rights.
This initiative takes place in a context of growing global concern with the role of social media in spreading misleading content and the deepening of the political divide. In Brazil, the topic became in vogue after the impacts of misinformation in recent elections, including attacks against the electoral system and attempts to delegitimize outcomes.
