Bill of Fake News: Understand what is at stake with regulation – 04/24/2023 – Power

With Congress pressured to act after the coup acts on January 8 and the attacks on schools, the Chamber of Deputies is expected to speed up the processing of the project to regulate social networks and messaging applications this week.

If the urgency of the proposal is approved, it goes directly to the plenary. Afterwards, it must return to the Senate, which had approved the original text in 2020.

The text under discussion brings together contributions from the proposal approved by the Senate and changes incorporated by the rapporteur in the Chamber, Deputy Orlando Silva (PC do B-SP).

1) Which project to combat fake news should be voted on? PL (bill) 2.630/2020 provides for the creation of the Brazilian Law on Freedom, Responsibility and Transparency on the Internet and was originally proposed by Senator Alessandro Vieira (PSDB-SE).

The version to be voted on in the Chamber should incorporate suggestions from the Lula government (PT) and the working group set up by the president of the TSE (Superior Electoral Court), Minister Alexandre de Moraes.

2) What are the main points of the original project?

• Duty of platforms to veto inauthentic accounts;
• Mandatory disclosure of quarterly transparency reports on content moderation;
• Creation of the Council for Transparency and Responsibility on the Internet, responsible for measures provided for by law and for carrying out studies, opinions and recommendations on freedom, responsibility and transparency on the Internet;
• Possibility for providers to create a self-regulation institution, certified by the council;
• Fine of up to 10% of the revenue of the economic group in Brazil in case of non-compliance with the law.

3) What points should be included in the vote in the House?

4) What do the platforms say? Meta, Twitter, Google and Tik Tok call for the rejection of the PL’s urgency and the creation of a special commission to deal with the issue.

They criticize the accountability of platforms for third-party content, which could, in the view of companies, lead to “private censorship”.

Google also says that the text can jeopardize the search for quality information and freedom of expression.

5) How would remuneration for journalistic content work? Newspaper companies would negotiate directly with big techs the payment for the content and, if they do not reach an agreement, there would be arbitration. The model follows the News Media Bargaining Code, adopted in Australia in 2021.

6) Is this remuneration proposal consensual? The platforms are opposed to the idea, and there is dissent among the vehicles. Entities such as Abert (Brazilian Association of Radio and Television Broadcasters), Aner (National Association of Magazine Editors) and ANJ (National Association of Newspapers), which bring together the main media vehicles, defend the PL; Smaller vehicles fear losing funding because they have less bargaining power.

7) What are the other controversies surrounding the proposal? Part of the opposition politicians to the Lula government claims that the internet supervisory body could practice censorship. PT management says that a regulatory body would guarantee transparency and compliance with the legislation instead of leaving the removal decision only to the platforms (or, in specific cases, to court decisions).