Brazil’s electoral court is examining whether Meta treated President Luiz Inácio Lula da Silva and challenger Flávio Bolsonaro equally on its platforms ahead of the Oct. 25 presidential runoff. Reports of internal company messages acknowledging restrictions on Lula’s Instagram account have fueled allegations that Meta’s systems gave Flávio greater visibility.
Meta denied favoring either campaign in its Oct. 19 filing with Brazil’s Superior Electoral Court, known as the TSE. The tech company outlined additional safeguards and asked to meet directly with the judge. The court has yet to determine whether Meta’s measures satisfy its requirements.
Justice Marco Aurélio Bellizze gave Meta 24 hours on Oct. 19 to submit information about its campaign practices. Meta had missed a previous deadline. He also increased the potential daily fine for noncompliance from 500,000 reais to 1 million reais, or about US$200,000.
The TSE had already ordered Meta to prevent artificial reductions in the reach of political-electoral content, including through recommendation systems and search restrictions. The court’s full bench upheld that decision on Oct. 16. The subsequent request sought details about recommendation systems, the reach of paid campaign advertising, investigations into potentially inauthentic accounts and the handling of content produced or altered using artificial intelligence.
Reports raise questions about platform restrictions
Lula’s campaign alleges that Meta’s systems restricted its content while making material supporting Flávio more visible. A report published by Folha de S.Paulo on Oct. 16 cited internal Meta messages in which employees acknowledged that restrictions had hindered Lula’s Instagram account and that Flávio’s profile had appeared in recommendations on Instagram and WhatsApp.
According to Folha, one Meta employee described Lula’s account as “limited” compared with Flávio’s. The message concerned an Oct. 9 incident in which Lula’s campaign could not pay to boost existing Instagram feed posts for almost 24 hours. The campaign estimated that the restriction cost the ads about 1.3 million potential views.
Folha also reported that a search for the WhatsApp channel Exército do Lula returned Flávio’s Tropa do Flávio channel. Flávio’s Instagram profile appeared in recommendations while other candidates’ profiles did not. The TSE’s order prohibited Meta from artificially reducing the distribution of political-electoral content, excluding candidates from recommendations or restricting searches in ways that could affect equal treatment.
Meta attributed the advertising problem to a technical failure and said the reported incidents did not reflect political favoritism. Flávio’s campaign told Folha that it had not experienced problems affecting the candidate’s accounts or channels.
A separate complaint concerned Meta AI. Lula’s campaign said the tool refused to generate images supporting Lula when prompts included his ballot number, 13, but generated images supporting Flávio when prompts used his number, 22. Meta temporarily banned candidate recommendations and AI image generation for presidential contenders. It also introduced restrictions on prompts containing candidates’ first names and ballot numbers.
The reported incidents have prompted further scrutiny, but they do not establish that Meta deliberately manipulated the election. The court’s review will determine whether the company’s systems and corrective measures meet the requirements of its orders.
Empleados Meta dicen que cuentas de Lula se vieron limitadas durante la elección: Folha https://t.co/nisGWKtneg
— el Nuevo Herald (@elnuevoherald) October 20, 2026
Meta outlines its response to the court
In its Oct. 19 submission, Meta argued that electoral equality requires applying the same rules and criteria to both campaigns, rather than guaranteeing identical results.
The company said it had implemented human review within two hours for automated restrictions on presidential campaign advertising accounts. The policy remains in force through election day on Oct. 25. Meta proposed coordinating with the court to report each restriction, its justification and the review outcome.
Meta also addressed the court’s investigation into potentially inauthentic accounts. The company said its review of 255 profiles found no evidence that they formed a coordinated inauthentic network. It also described measures concerning the identification of AI-generated material and other safeguards for political content.
Meta requested a meeting with Bellizze to discuss technical and procedural questions. Its submission sets out the company’s account of its compliance; the TSE must assess whether the evidence supports that position. The higher daily fine remains a potential penalty for noncompliance, not a finding that the company deliberately favored one candidate.
Debate and polls frame the dispute
The legal dispute comes during a tense runoff campaign. In their first face-to-face debate on Oct. 18, Lula and Flávio exchanged accusations over corruption and controversies involving their families. Lula called his opponent a “militiaman,” while Flávio accused the president of being tainted by corruption. A second debate is scheduled for Oct. 23.
Two polls published this week put the candidates close among valid votes. A RealTime Big Data poll published Oct. 20 showed Flávio leading Lula 52% to 48%, within a two-percentage-point margin of error. The survey interviewed 2,000 people by telephone from Oct. 15 to 19.
An AtlasIntel/Bloomberg poll published Oct. 19 put Flávio at 51.1% and Lula at 48.9%, with a one-percentage-point margin of error. It surveyed 4,998 respondents from Oct. 13 to 18 using online recruitment. The polls used different methods and field dates, so their results are not directly interchangeable.
With the runoff scheduled for Oct. 25, the TSE’s next step is to assess Meta’s submission and decide whether the company has met the court’s requirements. The court’s ruling will determine whether further evidence or enforcement measures are necessary before voting concludes.