Is Brazil's ban of social media platform X legal or political? | Inside Story
Summary
TLDRSocial media platform X faces a ban in Brazil due to non-compliance with a court order to block accounts related to disinformation. The incident has ignited debates on the impact of social media on politics, freedom of speech, and misinformation. Elon Musk, X's owner, claims the ban is a violation of free speech, while others argue it's a necessary measure to uphold sovereignty and judicial authority. The discussion highlights the challenges of regulating tech giants and the potential for similar actions in other countries.
Takeaways
- 📢 Social media platform X faces a ban in Brazil due to non-compliance with a court order to block accounts related to disinformation.
- 🗣️ Elon Musk, the owner of X, claims the ban is an attack on free speech and has accused the Brazilian Supreme Court judge of censorship.
- 🌐 The incident sparks a debate on the influence of social media in politics, freedom of speech, and the control of misinformation.
- 🚫 Brazil is not alone in restricting social media; X has been banned or restricted in countries like Pakistan, Venezuela, Russia, China, Iran, and Egypt.
- 💡 The ban raises questions about how social media giants should be regulated and whether censorship is being used as a political tool.
- 🤔 There's a division among Brazilians; some support the ban, viewing it as a necessary measure against disinformation, while others see it as a restriction on free speech.
- 🏛️ The Brazilian Supreme Court judge argues that X's refusal to comply with the court order is a violation of Brazilian sovereignty.
- 📉 The ban could significantly impact X, as Brazil is one of its largest markets, with approximately 40 million users.
- 🌟 Elon Musk is portrayed as a champion of free speech by some, especially those aligned with conservative views, while others see his actions as disrespectful to legal authorities.
- 🔍 The discussion highlights the broader global issue of how different countries are approaching the regulation of social media platforms and the balance between free speech and national laws.
Q & A
What is the main issue discussed in the video script?
-The main issue discussed is the ban of social media platform X in Brazil due to its failure to comply with a court order to block accounts linked to disinformation, and the ensuing debate over freedom of speech, political involvement, and the potential for other countries to follow suit.
Who is the Supreme Court judge involved in the dispute with Elon Musk?
-The Supreme Court judge involved in the dispute with Elon Musk is Judge Alexander de Mor.
What did Elon Musk call Judge de Mor, and why?
-Elon Musk called Judge de Mor an 'evil dictator', accusing him of trying to silence dissent and conservative views by ordering the suspension of accounts linked to spreading disinformation.
How has the Brazilian government responded to the ban of platform X?
-The Brazilian government, under President Luis inas Lula Silva, welcomed the ruling, stating that having a lot of money doesn't allow one to disrespect the Supreme Court.
What is the significance of the platform X being banned in Brazil?
-The ban is significant as Brazil is one of the largest markets for X, with approximately 40 million users, which is about one-fifth of the population accessing the platform at least once a month.
What are the arguments against the ban of X in terms of free speech?
-The arguments against the ban suggest that it is a transgression of the right to free speech and a suspension of democracy, with critics, particularly those associated with the right-wing, claiming that the ban is politically motivated.
How do the guests on the program view the ban as a response to Elon Musk's actions?
-The guests view the ban as a necessary measure taken by the Brazilian judiciary against the platform's refusal to comply with legal orders and its propagation of misinformation and hate speech.
What is the role of social media platforms like X in politics according to the discussion?
-Social media platforms like X play a significant role in politics by influencing the spread of information, shaping public opinion, and potentially affecting political outcomes, as evidenced by their impact on elections and political movements globally.
What are the implications of the ban for the freedom of speech and misinformation debate?
-The ban highlights the ongoing debate about the balance between freedom of speech and the need to control misinformation, with the incident raising questions about the accountability of social media platforms and the role of governments in regulating them.
How do the panelists suggest that other countries might approach the regulation of social media platforms?
-The panelists suggest that other countries might look to the Brazilian example as a precedent for establishing checks and balances, and for creating clear regulations that social media platforms must adhere to within their jurisdictions.
What is the potential impact of the ban on the operations of X and similar platforms globally?
-The potential impact includes a reevaluation of their legal responsibilities, a possible shift in their approach to complying with local laws, and a broader discussion on the global standards for social media regulation.
Outlines
📰 Social Media Giant X Faces Ban in Brazil
Social media platform X has been banned in Brazil due to its failure to comply with a court order to block accounts linked to disinformation. The ban has sparked a debate on the role of social media in politics, freedom of speech, and the spread of misinformation. Elon Musk, the owner of X, has criticized the ban as an attack on free speech. The situation has implications for how social media giants are regulated and whether censorship is being used as a political tool. The ban also raises questions about the potential for similar actions in other countries.
🗣️ Controversy Over Free Speech and Sovereignty
The ban of social media platform X in Brazil has stirred controversy, reflecting the country's political divide. While some support the court order, others, particularly those associated with the right-wing, claim it's a violation of free speech and democratic principles. Elon Musk has positioned himself as a champion of free speech, resisting what he views as politically motivated censorship. The debate touches on the broader question of whether free speech or national sovereignty should take precedence, with implications for how social media platforms are governed globally.
🌐 Global Implications and Political Divides
The ban of X in Brazil is part of a larger global narrative where social media platforms are being scrutinized for their role in politics and the spread of information. The platform's ban in Brazil follows similar actions in other countries like Pakistan, Venezuela, and Russia, each citing different reasons ranging from national security to contested elections. The situation highlights the power dynamics between tech giants and nation-states, as well as the complexities of balancing free speech with the need to prevent the spread of misinformation and hate speech.
🏛️ Legal and Political Tensions in Brazil
The decision to ban X in Brazil is a culmination of escalating tensions between the judiciary and the company. The judiciary has taken successive measures, including warnings and fines, leading up to the ban as a last resort. The situation underscores the need for clear regulations and norms for social media operations in different countries. It also reflects the broader challenges democracies face in holding tech companies accountable while navigating the political divides exacerbated by social media platforms.
🛑 The Impact of Unchecked Social Media Regulation
The ban of X in Brazil and the responses to it highlight the consequences of unchecked social media regulation. The discussion points to the need for a reevaluation of the balance between regulation and free expression, especially in the context of democratic societies. The situation serves as a lesson for other countries on the importance of establishing clear parameters and checks and balances for social media companies. It also underscores the role of politics in shaping the narrative around social media regulation and the influence of tech CEOs on public discourse.
📉 The Consequences for X and the Way Forward
The ban of X in Brazil has significant implications for the company, which has a substantial user base in the country. The discussion suggests that while the ban may be a setback, it also presents an opportunity for the company and other social media platforms to reassess their approach to regulation and compliance with local laws. It raises questions about the future of social media platforms in a global context where national laws and regulations are increasingly being enforced, and the need for these companies to adapt their strategies accordingly.
Mindmap
Keywords
💡Social Media Platform
💡Disinformation
💡Censorship
💡Free Speech
💡Elon Musk
💡Supreme Court Judge
💡Political Divide
💡Regulation
💡Misinformation
💡Sovereignty
Highlights
Social media platform X faces a ban in Brazil due to non-compliance with a court order to block disinformation-linked accounts.
Elon Musk, the owner of platform X, claims the ban is an attack on free speech and a form of political censorship.
The ban in Brazil adds to an ongoing global debate about social media's role in politics and the spread of misinformation.
The Brazilian Supreme Court judge argues that platform X has been used to spread disinformation, and Musk is accused of protecting dissenting conservative voices.
Brazil's current president supports the ban, stating that Musk's wealth does not excuse him from respecting the country's institutions.
Platform X has been banned or restricted in several countries, including Pakistan, Venezuela, Russia, China, Iran, and Egypt, often citing national security or political stability concerns.
The Brazilian ban could set a precedent for other countries considering similar actions against social media platforms that fail to comply with local regulations.
Flora Rebella Aruni, a guest on the show, argues that the ban is not a violation of free speech but a response to Musk's refusal to respect Brazilian law.
Chris Stokel-Walker suggests that Musk's actions are part of a pattern where he engages with political divides to assert his influence over elected governments.
Venus De Carvalho points out that the ban is temporary and intended to prompt compliance with Brazilian law, not a complete shutdown of the platform.
The discussion highlights the complexity of balancing free speech with the need to regulate social media to prevent the spread of misinformation and hate speech.
The ban in Brazil is seen by some as a necessary step to hold social media platforms accountable, while others view it as an overreach of government authority.
The show's guests express concerns about the lack of transparency in how social media algorithms may manipulate information and impact democracy.
The situation in Brazil is compared to other countries' approaches to regulating social media, with Europe being seen as a leader in establishing strict regulations.
The ban is discussed as a potential lesson for other countries on the importance of establishing clear regulations for social media operations within their jurisdictions.
The show concludes with a call for more international dialogue on creating checks and balances for social media companies to ensure they operate within the laws of the countries they serve.
Transcripts
social media platform X goes dark in
Brazil it failed to comply with a court
order to block accounts linked to
disinformation owner Elon Musk says it's
a Crackdown on Free Speech how much
politics is involved and could other
countries follow suit this is Inside
Story
[Music]
hello and welcome to the program I'm D
nauga social media giant X has been
banned in Brazil it's the latest
development in a months-long dispute
between a Supreme Court judge and Tech
billionaire Elon Musk over censorship
and disinformation Brazil isn't the
first country to restrict access to the
platform the ban is reigniting a debate
about the role social media plays in
politics freedom of speech and the
spread of misinformation how should
social media Giants be regulated and the
censorship being used as a political
tool we'll explore these issues on more
with our guests in a moment but first
this report by Kata Lopez
hon like many students 18-year-old Anna
gets her news from social media now that
X is banned in Brazil she's looking for
other platforms
people my age aren't really in the habit
of watching TV news or reading the news
and Twitter or X was a way to get news
from around the world so I've lost touch
a little with what's happening
globally Supreme Court Judge Alexander
de Mor says ex-owner Elon Musk failed to
comply with an order to suspend accounts
linked to spreading
disinformation and know the truth even
if the truth is unpopular mus called him
an evil dictator and accused him of
trying to silence dissent and
conservative
views the billionaire investor has
aligned himself with right-wing figures
like Brazil's former president T
bolsonaro and Donald Trump the current
president Luis inas Lula Silva welcomed
the ruling saying musk is out of
line having a lot of money doesn't allow
you to disrespect the Supreme Court Elon
musk's an American citizen he's not a
citizen of the world he can't offend
presidents Congressman the senate or the
Supreme Court who does he think he
is musk is repeatedly louded in
conservative and right-wing circles as a
hero of free speech and the role X
formerly known as Twitter plays in
politics globally is
significant the platform has been banned
in Pakistan since elections in February
with the government citing threats to
National Security as a reason
in Venezuela Nicolas Maduro shut it down
when Nationwide demonstrations broke out
in response to his contested election
Victory Russia also banned the app after
it invaded Ukraine in
2022 and temporary or permanent
restrictions have been imposed in
several countries including China Iran
and Egypt Brazilians have lost access to
the platform and can face Hefty fines if
they're caught using an encrypted
connection
when musk closes his office saying he
won't comply with court rulings the
Judiciary reacts it's not against Elon
Musk it's against any company especially
the big techs which sometimes feel very
comfortable disrespecting court
rulings Brazil's ban of the popular
social media site highlights the role it
and other platforms play in freedom of
speech misinformation and politics Kya
Lopez Alan Al jazer for insight story
okay let's bring in our guest joining us
from London is Flora rebella aruni who's
a senior adviser on technology and human
rights who led research and advocacy
projects on the role of disinformation
in Brazil's 2022 presidential elections
in Newcastle in the UK is Chris stokel
Walker who's a technology and digital
culture journalist he hosts a podcast
called tectonic which looks at freedom
of expression online
also joining us from London but just off
the plane from Brazil is Venus de
carvalo who's a reader in Brazilian
studies at King's College London and
also the founder of the observatory of
democracy in Latin America thanks for
your time with us on Inside Story um
venicius if I may start with you since
you're just off the plane in Brazil uh
from Brazil how is this being seen over
there thank you very much for having me
here first of all and yes just coming
back from brazila was just there when uh
this this order was issued by the
Judiciary and it's been quite
controversial of course we see a lot of
people that supporting this this court
order um and also those who are using
that mostly uh and especially those that
were associate with the the right-wing
govern previous government are
complaining that this is a sort of
transgression of the right of speech and
um and also a sort of suspension of
democracy in Brazil um I think this is
reflecting very well the sort of
division that the country seen even
before this court order decision so it's
just another another part of this game
uh of let's say division that the
country is leing right now okay Chris
the judge accused X of treating The
Social Network quote like a No Man's
Land a veritable land without law by
allowing the massive propagation of
misinformation hate speech and
anti-democratic attacks but at the same
time ex posted that the shutdown by the
judge is simply because we would not
comply with his illegal orders to censor
his political opponent opponents I mean
is this ultimately down to whether it's
a question of uh Free Speech versus
sovereignty I think that Elon Musk would
would like us to believe that I think
that uh many people uh in judiciaries
and in governments around the world
might be echoing what the Brazilian
judge said there although maybe not in
quite as strong terms because they try
and keep a relatively uh civil
relationship I suppose with Elon Musk
but yes this is undoubtedly the the kind
of area in which musk likes to dabble he
knows that it is possible for him to
kind of engage with political divides
and we've seen in Brazil a huge
political divide after the election and
he likes to try and decide that he is
going to get involved in this on a a
sort of social level and so he is seeing
this I think as a free speech fight I
think that the judge does have however
some very legitimate concerns whether we
we trust or or not trust the the kind of
request and the validity of those
requests to take down these things we do
know that Elon Musk has decided that he
is going to try and flout a lot of these
orders and take a grand stand while
doing so so I think that we ought to be
a little bit concerned about this in
terms of well if Elon Musk is doing this
and with Twitter and and kind of Brazil
is he going to do this with other
platforms elsewhere okay uh we'll get to
that a little later but let me bring in
Flora what's your opinion I mean does
this ban on X constitute a violation of
spre spe Free Speech uh principles or or
not absolutely not um braz is a
sovereign country and musk is sitting in
this virtual Ivory Tower where he claims
that he's entitled to theci side whether
to respect or not a Judicial measure
from the Supreme Court of the country so
it's not a matter of free speech again
he's using this um speech to make sure
that he engages um you know friendly
cohorts in Brazil and abroad to support
his illegal actions in Brazil you can
surely challenge uh legal de in court
and using the judicial uh system to do
so H it's entitled is our right but you
have to go through the system and right
now he's just simply deciding not to
respect what are you basing that on
Flora so unfortunately uh musk has been
doing very public several documents that
are confidential between the Supreme
Court and acts and for months now musk
has been public saying that he will
simply not respect judicial measures
coming from morai because he believes
they are unconstitutional and everybody
is entitled again to challenge decisions
but then you have to go through the
proper Judiciary process to do so and
musk is simply deciding to use its own
platform its own megaphone to decide
whether to comply or not with the laws
of a sovereign country and that's the
problem you should still even if you
don't agree with the decision just use
the judicial system around the country
so you can then challenge legally those
decisions that you think are unfair
venicius I see nodding to what Flora has
to say I mean the final straw we should
mention uh before X's Banning and
blocking in Brazil came on Thursday when
musk ignored a deadline that was put
forward by the Judiciary to name a new
legal representative for the country I
mean from the moment that X violated
that law by not naming a representative
wasn't it expected that they would be
held accountable for this
absolutely and I totally agree with my
both colleagues that mentioned said
before um I think that we what we have
here is just a violation of uh of a
Brazilian legal system and decisions of
the Judiciary and there are ways that
they can um they can go against this
this decision but it must observe the
legal terms here Elon Musk is not a
representative elected by the Brazilian
population to to act in the parliament
or in the Judiciary to say what is not
what is or not uh constitutional in the
country um another important aspect here
that many people and musk indeed as well
was saying that uh Moray was acting
monocratic in these decisions but um uh
to to support his decision next week I
think Monday already the Supreme Court
will join together to to vote the morai
decision and everything points out that
they will support it even considering
that a hard decision uh it will be voted
by this the the entire uh the entire
assemble of Judges the 12 judges of the
Supreme Court that means means that uh
we are getting here again a violation of
Brazilian sovereignity in some terms
when someone decided just because holds
a company that has makes a lot of money
um to to violate this these laws and
decisions of Justice in Brazil and the
second point it's important to say that
this sort of debates and controversies
are quite good for for X they they live
aot also based on that more more f for
debates and discussions that will give
more uh visibility to the platform and
to musk as well okay Chris I see you're
agreeing what Venus has to say on in
terms of the visibility when it comes to
X but but how significant is this
decision for the company itself because
as we know Brazil is one of the biggest
markets for x and there's a statistic
market research group E marketer says
some 40 million Brazilians that's
roughly 1if of the population access X
at least once a
month yeah if we we contextualize that
further e marketers data is sometimes a
little bit shaky sometimes overstates
things a little little bit based on
different measurements and so it's not
like for like but you know X's user base
is probably also around about a fifth of
that is Brazilian uh maybe a little bit
less maybe a little bit more depending
on how you count but this would be a
significant blow in terms of the number
of users that it loses but it is frankly
uh playing into Elon musk's hands I
suppose that this is banned and it goes
back to what Flora said and also what
felus has said in terms of this is
musk's Mo he likes to pick fights with
people and and try and test their metal
and decide whether or not he is bigger
and more powerful than elected
governments elected judges those who sit
in power and have this kind of
democratic right to say these are the
laws of our country either you like them
or lump them and he's done this in the
past with Australia he he's gone into a
fight with their e safety commissioner
who's in charge of overseeing their
Online safety law over uh trying to take
down uh videos of images of a an attack
at a church that will broadcast through
X the E safety commissioner required
those to be taken down musk and X
basically took them to court he's doing
the same thing in Europe in the global
North in terms of arguing with tierry
Breton one of the commissioners of the
European Union over whether or not they
are breaking rules here and the EU has
taken uh preliminary action to decide
that X is in in breach of uh one of the
the digital markets act or the Digital
Services act in terms of not doing
things by the book so um yeah this is
musk realizing that he likes to be the
center of attention realizing that all
publicity is good publicity when it
comes to this sort of stuff and thinking
well I'm going to take a risk that
actually these people won't follow
through on their threats it just turns
out that increasingly we're seeing those
sorts of judiciaries those sorts of
governments really are okay Chris hang
on a second I got to ask you this I mean
you say that this is sort of um of Elon
musk's Mo but if you look at what
happened back in 2009 what the Obama
Administration at the time insisted it's
not meddling in Iran confirmed it had
asked Twitter at the time it was called
Twitter to remain open to help
anti-government protesters which were
taking place during
2009 Twitter had planned to temporarily
shut down the government intervened
asked them to stay online I wonder to
what extent X is sort of embedded or
following the US policy agenda and this
is simply not his own Mo as you call
it I think that's not true I think that
musk frankly wouldn't be cow Towing to
any US president not even Donald Trump I
believe that if Trump were to be elected
in uh November musk would probably
believe that he is a smarter individual
he has more power and he doesn't need to
follow those rules he could shape those
rules and so given the political divide
between him and Joe Biden and the Kam La
harus ticket as well I don't think that
there is any uh idea that musk might be
uh somehow in bed with them it is
interesting you do point out a really
fascinating point of which is you know X
formerly Twitter has long been the sort
of cradle of uh Democratic uh decision
making and the ability to kind of stir
up a populace against often
authoritarian Rule and and so there is
this concern here we had in the package
uh that opened up our discussion that it
is banned in in many kind of
authoritarian States and and viewers of
Al jaer will remember a decade and a
half ago the Arab Spring basically being
fermented through social media platforms
like Twitter actually being able to
share footage and and information about
what was happening helped bring that
across the region here I don't think
this is necessarily what's happening in
Brazil I think that um you know there is
an element of politics here no doubt we
know that Lula is very different to
bolaro in terms of his presidency and
political viewpoints as our two other
panelists will be able to comment on in
much more detail than I could but we
also know I think here um that there is
a difference between um what's happening
now and in Brazil and what happened
perhaps in 2009 in Iran and in the rest
of the Middle East around the Arab
Spring Flora would you like to weigh in
on
this of course um thank you Chris for
this because this is very important the
L latest decision to b x it's a
culmination of months of escalation and
it has been showed in the in the the
piece before so there were two Milestone
moments right this year back in April
2024 musk has deliberately decided to
put back online several profiles that
were under investigation already by the
Justice right spreading disinformation
hate speech and these individuals they
were monetizing on that content right so
April 2024 musk says I'm not respecting
any more judicial measures and that's
the escalation that started so the ban
of Twitter is actually the latest the
last resort that the Justice had in its
hands because when Twitter decided to
close its office last week and then
there was no legal representative in the
country to respond to any judicial
measure um then they were given 24 hours
to appoint a new legal representative
after those 24 hours there was no really
other measure to be taken by the
Judiciary in the country and the civil
law in Brazil sorry actually the civil
law in Brazil Demands a legal
representative to be appointed and the
internet bill in Brazil gives all those
you know escalation of measures by the
Judiciary so they gave a warning they
issued fines they warned that it would
be suspended and ultimately it led to
the ban so we've got to see this as an
escalation of events and not necessarily
something that just happened this week
because Justice um are tired of the
attacks that musk has been directing
towards them okay Chris go ahead and
respond yeah I just wanted to to add a
little bit more context to what what
Flor said I think it's really important
that we we think about this to listeners
and viewers of this program will have
seen me appearing earlier this week on
on a discussion similar to this around
pav durov the the CEO of telegram and
one of the issues around telegram that
we've had is with French authorities uh
that essentially there has not been that
accountability for issues of law
enforcement for issues of government
requests where there are these real
concerns around spreading disinformation
and so on so yes that trigger point all
this being there is no legal
representative for X is essentially an
abdication of responsibility by Elon
Musk and X more like the similar thing
that we've seen with pavl durov and I
think that's why we're starting to see
this drastic action against these Tech
CEOs first durov and Telegram and now
musk and X is that previously we've
always found social media CEOs a bit of
a problem frankly they they have often
kind of ignored the rules and pushed the
boundaries and the the the benefit of
what we would call disruption and
disruption has two different meanings
depending on whether you're a Silicon
Valley texi or you're the rest of the
world who affected by those decisions
but I think what's different here is
that even when it comes down to it at
the crunch Point those tech companies
have actually acceded to requests and
had those elements whereas now with with
musk here in particular and durov last
week There's an indication here that
they've refused to they've stepped away
from this due process of of judicial
reviews and also government requests to
try and say no we know better than you
and and our way or the highway is the
rule here okay Venus I mean is there a
feeling in Brazil
amongst those who uh do not support this
ban that the government that the
Brazilian government the judge in fact
could have taken uh perhaps alternative
measures to address uh the concerns
without resorting to a complete ban and
if so what are
they well yes and um I think one of the
topics that connect what our colleagues
were saying here um is that many people
in Brazil calling that a censorship um
but it's important to make a very clear
distinction here X is not burned in
Brazil it's temporary ly suspended until
it complies with uh uh some some
regulations and some um decisions of the
court so it's not a question of being
burned it's just to to to be comp
compliance with the law that's the first
point and of course many of the the
oppositions of the government in
particular or those who have their
accounts um Frozen or requested by law
to be put down um they are using that as
an opportunity to say that really there
is bias in the Brazilian uh decision on
the court here and the second point that
I would like to make also connecting to
what uh my colleague said before um is
that it's not clear how the platform
Works operate democratically speaking
it's not that everything that's sp there
it's really being treated the same way
we don't know clearly what algorithmic
system is in use to to share and more or
less um posts uh it's not clear how this
is been used in terms of uh manipulating
information so the risk uh for for this
here is huge and it's also proved that
this was important too in the attacks of
8 of January that you are just showing
now some image to to the audience so
it's clear that we have here really a
platform that in some way was actually
encouraging more anti-democracy than the
Democracy that pretends to be uh
spreading or
promoting okay Flora we touched upon
this a little bit I mean I wonder if you
can elaborate on how this action by
Brazil compares to other countries
approaches to regulating or suspending
uh social media
platforms right I think Chris brought a
very important point that I that I would
love uh to elaborate indeed so we are
seeing Trend in indeed that authorities
because there aren't necessarily
specific legislations to um hold social
media platforms accountable they're
having to rely on the existing laws
which is absolutely perfect and that's
how the way it should be but we also
have to be aware that not necessarily
the laws that we have in place in many
countries US is an example Brazil is
another example necessarily attend the
broad and vast uh different levels of
operation of these platforms and so if
we if you look at Brazil just last year
um we were about to vote a legislation a
bill called the fake news bill in Brazil
big Tech platforms although publicly
they say that they want to be regulated
and they would love to be regulated to
have legal certainty when attempts are
to actually pass a legislation they use
their own platforms and their own forums
to curb those um those attempts so we
are seeing X doing this now against the
judicial measures last year we saw meta
and Google using its own platforms to
convince the population that a bill
wasn't necessary and that bill would
just curb on freedom of speech so there
is different levels of how these
platforms try to shape the narratives
around legislations being put in place
to hold hold them accountable um we
mentioned briefly about Europe Europe
has been it is a model now it is a
blueprint for other countries to follow
suit in terms of how to regulate social
media platforms and we saw friends that
Chris mentioned before and that's also
important to realize us B Tik Tok so we
are seeing different levels of
accountability towards these platforms
that um are necessary because we as
society as democracies need to catch up
to these technological uh advancements
Chris do these measures though go far
enough or are we just at this point
seeing kind of um toughening up by
governments around the world towards
these social media platforms who are
saying look if you're going to overstep
then we're going to have to step in and
do something about it but but is it
enough I I think that um putting the
fear of God into Tech CEO is by
arresting admittedly a relatively small
one uh last week and
now standing up to a rather bigger one
and saying well we're going to cut off
one of your biggest markets is better
than we've done before I'm not going to
say that it is perfect but I think that
previously you the the long history of
the internet and social media in
particular is one of about a 25 years of
in action and trusting that big Tech
Executives will make their own rules and
that sunlight is the best disinfectant
and that we can trust them to step in
when it's needed and because of that we
had January 6th in the United States
we've had January the 8th in Brazil
which we've shown footage of and which
venicius was talking so eloquently about
the impact of there about these
anti-democratic measures that happen and
and we have also this huge confusion and
we we can't escape the fact that
politics is always tied up in this and
the Brazil case is a perfect example of
this you know fici has talked about how
this is essentially you know potentially
right-wing voices trying to get back a
little bit at leftwing voices claiming
censorship when in fact actually uh
Twitter's research admittedly before
Elon Musk took over although I don't
think many impartial observers would say
that Elon Musk has taken X as he's
rebranded it in anything like a leftwing
direction in fact probably the opposite
but back then Twitter did exhibit a a
right-wing bias in terms of the accounts
that it Amplified through its algorithm
and that was Twitter's own research
realizing that is the issue so um you
know there is this really interesting
element of both the people who recognize
that there does need to be an element of
bringing these Executives back to heal
are often those who are the most divided
in terms of how this should be done
because we are both simultaneously
living in the consequences of unchecked
uh social media regulation and also
trying to wrestle with it while having
that political divide that has been
caused by it venicius go ahead I see you
nodding and also I mean do you think
that there are any lessons from the
situation that that other countries
might learn from regarding uh the
balance between regulation and free
expression yes absolutely um I think um
even if it looks hard I think it's a
good decision and a decision that will
change parameters from now on on how big
TCH and X or other social media
companies uh we operate in some
countries thinking that they can just go
over uh regulations of those countries
um I think it's a good a good parameter
also to to show us how important is what
Flora said to discuss more uh more
clearly the regulations and norms for
for operations of those companies um in
different countries countries have
different rules and laws and they need
be observed there is no company that is
over and above all laws in the world and
Chris mentioned quite clearly we have
already enough data and enough studies
and research to start to create
parameters and I think this situation in
Brazil today even looking hard um it's a
good step in terms of giving more
more as I said parameters to to create
checks and balances for those companies
operating in democracies that's what I
think we need now and that's a lesson
that Brazil can be teaching now for many
countries in the world that taught that
they never could face powers like
those all right we'll have to leave it
there thank you so much for joining us
thanks to my guest Flora rebella aruni
Chris stok Walker and venicius dealo
thanks so much thank you for watching
you can see the program again anytime by
visiting our website Al ja.com for
further discussion you can go to our
Facebook page facebook.com/ AJ Insight
story you can also join that
conversation on X our handle is AJ
inside story from myself the whole team
here in delha thanks for watching and
bye-bye for now
[Music]
5.0 / 5 (0 votes)