Secretary of Digital Policies bets on support for the Fake News PL

Brasilia DF) – The National Secretary for Digital Policies, João Brant, denied that the current text of Bill (PL) 2630, of 2020, promotes internet censorship. For Brant, the project, better known as PL das Fake News, has the support of the vast majority of the population. The text establishes the Brazilian Law of Freedom, Responsibility and Transparency on the Internet. The objective is to regulate the services provided by multinational technology companies through their digital platforms.

“Brazilian society lives today under the impact of completely unregulated social networks”, said Brant while participating in a public hearing that the Communication Commission of the Chamber of Deputies promoted this Thursday (4th) to discuss the dissemination of false information and hateful messages on social media.

“The Chamber of Deputies has the opportunity to vote on a balanced bill, built from debates [realizados] over the last three years, and which balances rights in a sophisticated way, [procurando conciliar a] protection of freedom of expression in the individual and collective senses with other rights that are at stake”, added the secretary, calling on the parliamentarians to put the PL to a vote. “Eighty percent of the population is in favor of regulating the platforms”, assured the secretary.

Until the beginning of the week, there was an expectation that the project would be taken to the plenary of the Chamber on Tuesday (2), so that the federal deputies could vote, but the president of the House, deputy Arthur Lira (PP-AL), ended up removing the subject from the agenda, at the request of the project’s rapporteur, Deputy Orlando Silva (PCdoB-SP), who claimed not to have had “useful time to examine all the suggestions” to the text.

“We are facing an opportunity. The Chamber is able to make the necessary adjustments to the project, which needs to be voted on so that we can move on to new times”, maintained Brant, highlighting the urgency of the issue. “We cannot wait for further attacks on schools. I call on the Chamber to approve this project in the coming weeks.”

The audience included the participation of six other debaters, representatives of civil society organizations – all in favor of the regulation of digital platforms and critics of the way in which, according to them, the large multinational technology companies, the so-called Big Techs, acted to influence the public debate in defense of their interests.

Google

On Tuesday (3), the National Consumer Secretariat (Senacon), of the Ministry of Justice, determined that Google would comply with a series of precautionary measures to correct the indications that the company was censoring the public debate on the so-called PL of Fake News and illegally disclosing ciphered political advertising in its search engine – the most popular in the world, used for searches by virtually all Brazilian internet users. On the same day, the President of the Superior Electoral Court (TSE) and Minister of the Federal Supreme Court (STF) ordered Google, Meta (controller of Facebook, Instagram and Whatsapp), Spotify and the Brasil Paralelo channel to remove texts with attacks on the PL. The minister also determined that the Federal Police (PF) hear the testimonies of executive representatives of the companies.

Arising from an administrative proceeding initiated by the Consumer Protection and Defense Department, the precautionary measures that Senacon imposed on Google were motivated, among other things, by the disclosure, on the main page of the search engine, next to the search box, a text in which the company maintained that “The Fake News PL can increase confusion about what is true or false in Brazil”. O link referred the internet user to an article signed by the director of Government Relations and Public Police at Google, Marcelo Lacerda, and published in blog of the company. Shortly after the Ministry of Justice and Public Security announced the measures that Google would have to comply with, the link has been deleted from the main page. The article, however, is still available on blog from the company.

“I consider yesterday to be a very unfortunate day for the participation of these companies in our democracy. We lived, in this last weekend, [algo equivalente a] a new 8th of January”, said the representative of the organization Coalition Rights on the Network, Paulo Rená, whose opinion was corroborated by Bruno Marinoni, of the organization Right to Communication and Democracy (Diracom).

“Indeed, this week was a historic milestone in the fight against misinformation and hate speech. We had the expectation that we would take an important step towards regulating this system that promotes and facilitates the circulation of disinformation and hate messages, but, ironically, despite the postponement [da votação do PL na Câmara], the masks fell off and it became clear who the agents involved in this dispute are. Faced with the risks to their private interests, platforms that present themselves as defenders of the free flow of information and against censorship have chosen to expose themselves and show how limited the commitment they claim to have with certain principles is. We saw how much they are willing to neglect what is the basics of a sociability based on democratic values ​​and freedom of expression and social justice”, commented Marinoni.

Campaigns Director for the NGO Avaaz, Laura Belles de Moraes, criticized the Chamber of Deputies for not having voted on the text already approved by the Senate, after almost three years of debates. “I am exhausted. And I think I speak on behalf of the rest of civil society who have been here, in this House, defending civil society’s views. We have been fighting for more than three years for democratic regulation; we have contributed with technical information, but what we saw was a disloyal, lying attack, an economic abuse [perpetrado] across platforms. And we felt that the Chamber was not prepared to [lidar com] it,” Laura said. “What are we waiting for? That all countries in the world regulate social networks so that we are the last, since we have always been a reference in digital regulation?”

The executive director of Instituto Vero, Caio Machado, defended the need for regulation that imposes on technology companies the obligation to be more transparent. For him, the technical debate on how to regulate the sector must be guided by evidence, escaping the “polarization that has taken over the country, largely due to the communication that social networks” promote. “The accusation that the platforms obstructed the participation of certain groups in society and modulated the reach and access to posts is very serious. These platforms are the operators of the structure of our public sphere and may be using that to their advantage by manipulating the structure.”

Coordinator of the Legal Reference Center Article 19, Raquel da Cruz Lima also criticized the current lack of operational transparency of technology companies. Like the national secretary for Digital Policies, João Brant, Raquel also refuted the thesis that the regulation of digital services is an attempt, a priori, to censor freedom of expression and access to information.

“Freedom of expression and access to information are rights enshrined in international human rights treaties. Treaties that Brazil has ratified and which, therefore, it has an obligation to implement. In the light of these treaties, freedom of expression is an inherent right of the person, essential for the survival of democracies, but which is not limited to an individual guarantee, as it also has a social dimension, corresponding to the right of people to receive and know information and ideas shared by other people,” said Raquel.

*With information from Agência Brasil

See more:

PF takes action against company suspected of monitoring police operations

Federal Police investigate drug traffickers and seize BRL 1 billion