Politics · Brazil · 20 hrs ago
Meta faces claims of bias ahead of Brazil’s presidential runoff
Brazilian President Luiz Inácio Lula da Silva faces right-wing challenger Flávio Bolsonaro in a presidential runoff on 25 October.
Lula’s campaign says Meta, which owns WhatsApp, Instagram and Facebook, has suspended its advertising account, suppressed posts and blocked AI-generated campaign material.
Images circulating online appear to show Meta AI refusing to create posters for Lula while producing one for Flávio Bolsonaro, though Meta says its systems blocked both surnames and denies favouring any candidate.
Brazil’s electoral prosecutors say Meta did not fully meet court orders for equal treatment, and UN human rights experts have raised concerns about possible unequal treatment.
The election is the first in Brazil since large language models became widely popular, and fact-checkers identified hundreds of pieces of AI-generated or altered election content, many without labels.
Online campaigning has also become a major battleground: Bolsonaro’s camp led online in the first round, while Lula supporters organised a large WhatsApp campaign between rounds.
The runoff will determine who wins the presidency, as questions about AI and social media safeguards remain unresolved.
Lula’s campaign has accused Meta of favouring his runoff opponent, Flávio Bolsonaro, through its advertising and AI systems.
Meta denies favouring or interfering on behalf of any candidate and says a one-hour suspension of Lula’s account was a mistake.
Brazil’s electoral prosecutors said Meta had not fully complied with court orders on equal treatment, while UN human rights experts raised concerns about possible unequal treatment.
The claims come as the candidates compete online ahead of Brazil’s presidential runoff on 25 October.
Both camps accuse Meta of favouring the other side, and the election has seen widespread AI-generated political content.
- Who
- Incumbent Luiz Inácio Lula da Silva and challenger Flávio Bolsonaro, along with Meta.
- What
- Lula’s campaign alleges Meta’s platforms and AI tools favour Bolsonaro; Meta denies political bias. Both camps accuse Meta of favouring the other.
- When
- Ahead of the presidential runoff on 25 October 2026.
- Where
- Brazil; Meta owns WhatsApp, Instagram and Facebook.
- Why
- The campaigns dispute how Meta handles their advertising and political content. Meta says some restrictions resulted from systems blocking prompts containing the candidates’ names.
Lula’s campaign
Meta
Alleged bias
Lula’s campaign
Lula’s campaign says Meta suspended its advertising account, suppressed posts and blocked AI-generated content, favouring Bolsonaro.
Meta
Meta says claims that it favours or interferes on behalf of a candidate or political group are false and unfounded.
Account suspension
Lula’s campaign
Lula’s campaign cites the suspension of its advertising account as an example of unequal treatment.
Meta
Meta says the account was suspended for one hour by mistake.
AI image generation
Lula’s campaign
Lula’s campaign submitted screenshots it says show Meta AI assigning Bolsonaro’s number to fictional politicians and translating a phrase about Flávio Bolsonaro as “Flávio future president”.
Meta
Meta says its systems blocked prompts referring to “Lula” and “Bolsonaro”, but not the common first names Luiz or Flávio.
Fact-checking organisation Lupa identified 920 pieces of AI-generated or manipulated election content, primarily on Facebook and Instagram.
Lula’s campaign used an online effort called “O Exército do Lula” to counter the Bolsonaro camp’s earlier online dominance.
Lula and Flávio Bolsonaro are due to face each other in the presidential runoff.
- Runoff date
- 25 October 2026
- Meta-owned platforms
- WhatsApp, Instagram and Facebook
- Lula account suspension
- 1 hour, according to Meta
- Election content identified by Lupa
- 920 pieces of AI-generated or manipulated content
- Unlabelled share of identified content
- 60 per cent
- Subscribers to Lula’s Army WhatsApp channels
- 8 million
3 sources
What people are saying
claims that we are favoring or interfering on behalf of any candidate or political group are false and unfounded
But when a technical glitch tends to repeat its outcome, it’s very hard to accept that this is just a technical failure.
So much of our political campaign dynamics have been transferred to privatised companies that we have no idea how they operate.
Are the safeguards working? That’s one question. But working for what, because it depends on what your goals are,