Overview

The relationship between X’s owner, Elon Musk, and the Brazilian government reached a breaking point when Justice Alexandre de Moraes’ requested Musk to name a legal representative for the country. After the 24-hour ultimatum concluded, in which X failed to comply with Moraes’ demands, Anatel (Brazil’s regulator for telecommunications) began the process of removing access to X throughout the country. This was a massive topic in Brazil because around 40 million Brazilians, one-fifth of the country’s population, consistently accessed X at least once a month prior to the ban. Elon Musk and X fought back, saying that their noncompliance was due to Moraes’ orders being illegal and conflicting with the company’s emphasis on free speech. Elon Musk and X further contended that the Brazilian judge was trying to censor political opponents. After X finally complied with demands to block certain accounts, pay fees, and name a legal representative, it was restored across Brazil.

Pointed Summary

• A disconnect between X, Elon Musk, and Brazilian Justice Alexandre de Moraes led to X being banned in Brazil
• This ban affected around 40 million Brazilians who regularly used X
• This debate centers around what is considered free speech and how much control another government can hold over an American company

History

The path to the eventual ban of X in Brazil began when Supreme Justice Alexandre de Moraes demanded that certain X accounts be removed for spreading political misinformation. Finding that most of these accounts belonged to supporters of former Brazilian President Jair Bolsonaro, who aligns with right-wing ideals and has been accused of staging a coup, Elon Musk refused. Musk claimed to believe Justice Moraes' request was in violation of Brazilian law as a form of censorship. Musk had previously “complied with similar orders in other countries, such as India,” which may cast doubt upon his stated principle of free speech.

After threats of arrest and a fine of $3,653 were imposed on the X representative in Brazil, Musk closed their operations in the country. Justice Moraes then imposed a deadline for X to instate a new representative, which X did not meet. This led to its nationwide ban on August 30.

While a slight majority of Brazilians believe Moraes was in the right, many also think the consequences he ordered were extreme. Several groups, including the conservative Partido Novo, asked the Supreme Court to reverse Moraes’ decision, but the Court upheld it. The banning of social media platforms by governments is not uncommon, especially during times of political unrest. In 2014, Turkey banned Twitter, Facebook, and YouTube after audio recordings revealing corruption in President Recep Erdogan’s inner circle were released.China has banned thousands of websites, such as The New York Times and social media platforms, under their Great Firewall plan.

On October 8, when X completed the three demands from de Moraes—to block from the platform certain accounts that had planned to harm federal officials, pay over 5 million U.S. dollars in fees, and instate a proper legal representative—the ban was lifted.

‍

Policy Options

Due to the public nature of X, it will be difficult for Musk to be able to completely oversee what occurs on the app. However, there are several courses of action that both Musk and the Brazilian government could take to prevent the spread of misinformation or propaganda.

First of all, Musk should take steps toward ensuring accurate information about political candidates and news. For example, there could be colored identification tags on posts that mark whether something is accurate or not, and also whether something is left or right leaning. Another solution that could be implemented is the addition of resources and links to information on accuracy-marked political and election posts, much like the current community notes feature.

Another option for X would be to direct users to official government accounts based on tweets that indicate their desire to learn more about politics/elections. X could also restrict the spread of misinformation using keywords that relate to important events, like the results of an election. If detected to include those keywords, there could be a delay for verification before posting. Accounts on X that specifically post about political and governmental issues/events could also be labeled as such and given a public score of their accuracy and reliability. The company could also add a confirmation page before posting tweets that contain sensitive political information. This mechanism could serve as a deterrent for misinformation by allowing users to reevaluate the accuracy and intention behind their post, as they would consider whether or not it’s worth getting potentially flagged. Aside from focusing more on political accuracy on the platform, X could be more proactive regarding threats such as those against the Brazilian government agents by right-wing accounts.

However, the entire responsibility of the crisis is not solely on Musk and X. The Brazilian government could also provide resources for the public in their own media that present Brazilian citizens with verified information, which is more effective than the use of social media as a direct source of information. This could also be done by a neutral third-party source to limit potential bias. Furthermore, international diplomacy could be implemented in the form of a conference on censorship in social media among various governments.