US Supreme Court decision does not make the Fake News Bill illegal – 05/25/2023 – Power

US Supreme Court decision does not make the Fake News Bill illegal – 05/25/2023 – Power

It is false that a decision by the Supreme Court of the United States regarding the moderation of content on Google and Twitter could interfere with the processing in the National Congress of a project to regulate big techs in Brazil.

Likewise, as verified by the Comprova Project, the understanding has no power over the judgment, by the STF (Federal Supreme Court), of actions on the Civil Rights Framework for the Internet, scheduled for the second half of June. Two lawsuits address article 19, which states that companies can only be held responsible for user content if they fail to take action following a court order. The other two actions question whether messaging apps – such as Telegram and WhatsApp – can be suspended if they do not comply with a court decision.

The decision of the US Supreme Court, quoted by federal deputy Gustavo Gayer (PL-GO) in a video, defines that victims of terrorist attacks cannot hold Twitter and Google responsible for posts encouraging the Islamic State made on their platforms, even though they boosted the content. The lawsuit was filed by family members of American victims of terrorist attacks in Turkey in 2017 and in France in 2015.

This decision, however, is not valid in Brazil because the US Supreme Court has no jurisdiction here. Furthermore, the laws and other regulations that regulate social networks in the United States are different from those that deal with the subject in Brazil.

Therefore, unlike what the deputy says in the video, an American judicial decision, even if issued by the Supreme Court of that country, does not make a bill illegal in Brazil.

It is also not true that the Brazilian media deliberately failed to report the fact. The decision of the Supreme Court of the United States was publicized by several Brazilian vehicles, such as SheetUOL, Jornal Nacional, Exame, O Tempo and Politics 360.

Furthermore, there is no statement from the US government about its intention to intervene in Brazil because of the project.

False, for Comprova, is content that was invented or that has been edited to change its original meaning and deliberately disseminated to spread a falsehood.


Comprova investigates suspicious content with greater reach on social networks. On TikTok, the verified post had, until May 24, 63.2 thousand likes, 2.2 thousand comments and 11.2 thousand shares.

How do we check

The first step was to seek information about the decision of the American Supreme Court mentioned in the video, whether it was published in Brazil and about the regulation of social networks in other countries.

Next, we interviewed a specialist in Constitutional Law. We also researched in the Brazilian news and in the United States, if there was a position of this country regarding intervention in Brazil. Finally, we tried to contact the authors of the video and post on TikTok.

no interference

On May 18, the United States Supreme Court ruled unanimously that victims of terrorist attacks in the country could not hold Twitter and Google responsible for posts encouraging the Islamic State that circulate on the platforms.

As explained by UOL, two cases of responsibility related to victims of terrorism in attacks in Turkey, in 2017, and in Paris, in 2015, were judged.

The Court decided to uphold Section 230 of the Communications Decency Act, 1996, on which the regulation of social networks in the country is based. According to the legislation, the State is exempt from influencing the activities of companies considered to be service providers. In this way, social networks may have their own content moderation rules. The rules for using twitter and Google are available across platforms.

From the court decision, it will be more difficult in that country for companies to respond to lawsuits for content posted by users of the platforms. The case was publicized by the main newspapers in the United States, such as the Washington Post and the New York Times.

To the report, the assistant professor of constitutional and administrative law at UFRJ (Federal University of Rio de Janeiro), Carolina Cyrillo, explained that the decision taken in the United States in no way interferes with the approval or rejection of bill 2630 – dubbed PL das Fake News —, under discussion in the Brazilian Chamber of Deputies, because the United States Supreme Court has exclusive jurisdiction in the North American country.

“In Brazil, the Brazilian superior courts exercise national jurisdiction.

She adds that the text does not propose the violation of any fundamental right and, therefore, there is no illegality. “Public and political debate is part of a deliberative democracy,” she concludes.

Brazil is not the first country to regulate social networks. Last year, 27 countries in the European Union adopted the Digital Services Act. The text addresses the trade and exchange of illegal goods, services and online content, as well as algorithmic systems that amplify the spread of misinformation.

The European Parliament explained that the aim is to give people greater control over what they consume online. In this way, users are informed, for example, about the reasons why a certain content is recommended. In addition, advertising aimed at minors is prohibited, as is the use of sensitive data, such as sexual orientation, religion or ethnicity.

By stating that the Brazilian press would not disclose the decision of the American court, Gayer also misinformed. The matter was reported in Brazil by several vehicles, such as SheetUOL, Jornal Nacional, Exame, O Tempo and Politics 360.

What the person responsible for the publication says

The report contacted Gustavo Gayer through his office in the Chamber of Deputies, but did not receive a response. It was not possible to contact the TikTok user @eltonsilva7, who claimed that it was a video commenting on the US intervention in Brazil. The platform only allows sending messages between contacts. No other social network was found where he has a profile either.

What can we learn from this check

In the video checked here, the author used international news, whose theme is close to what is under discussion in the local political scenario, to misinform and, in this way, try to gain the sympathy of social network users for the point of view defended by him .

The politician also tries to raise alarm by maintaining that the country “has become an international pariah” and that attempts are being made to “establish a censorship regime in Brazil”. This approach can scare those who consume the content and the tip is always to raise the alarm for publications in alarmist and urgent tones, researching the subject with the professional press, recognized institutes and government bodies.

In this case, despite the deputy claiming that the Brazilian media would not report the US decision, it was published by vehicles in the country that have credibility. The reports never state that the decision in another location would make the national discussion illegal.

Finally, if the United States threatened to intervene in Brazil, given the seriousness of the matter, it would be widely publicized by the news not only in both countries, but in the world.

why do we investigate

Comprova monitors suspicious content published on social networks and messaging apps about public policies and elections at the federal level and opens investigations for those publications that have achieved greater reach and engagement. You can also suggest checks via WhatsApp +55 11 97045-4984. Suggestions and questions related to questionable content can also be sent to Sheet via WhatsApp 11 99486-0293.

Other checks on the topic

Deputy Gustavo Gayer has already been denied in previous verifications by Comprova that demonstrated, for example, that his video is misleading by showing partial results of a poll with the intention of voting for president and that a document does not prove fraud in the 2018 elections.

Source link