In view of the changes in the rules of the Facebook and Instagram announced last Tuesday (7), different entities and collectives that bring together LGBTI+ people have expressed fear about a possible increase in the volume of hate speech and homophobic messages on the two digital platforms, which demand the Brazilian government and the National Congress to adoption of measures aimed at protecting human rights.
“It is necessary to review Grupo Meta’s performance in the country and, if applicable, impose sanctions to ensure that the digital environment does not become a stage for democratic setbacks and rights violations”, records a note released on Thursday (9) by the National LGBTI+ Alliance and by the Brazilian Association of Homotransaffective Families (ABRAFH).
One of the entities’ biggest concerns involves the dissemination of speeches that classify homosexuality or transgenderism as a mental illnessdespite the current scientific consensus rejecting such theses. In the United States, the changes have already been applied. Under the new rules, homophobic, xenophobic and misogynistic insults that were previously filtered are being released.
The changes were announced through a video statement by Mark Zuckerberg, executive president of Meta, which controls the two platforms. The main change is the end of fact checking, which aims to detect and point out errors, inaccuracies and lies in posts. In practice, this means that no further work will be carried out to confirm and prove information conveyed by Instagram and Facebook users. Zuckerberg informed that a community notes model will be adopted, similar to that of the X platform controlled by businessman Elon Musk. Through this model, users themselves can add information contesting the veracity of certain content.
Zuckerberg also announced changes involving content moderation, such as reducing the use of filters that search for content that violates terms of use. “It’s a trade-off. It means we’ll map fewer bad things, but we’ll also reduce the number of posts from innocent people that we accidentally take down,” he said.
For the National LGBTI+ Alliance and ABRAFH, the situation is alarming. “This decision violates the principles of human rights, rolling back historical achievements and reinforcing stigmas that put lives in danger. It is essential to remember that, since 1990, the World Health Organization has not recognized homosexuality as a disease, a position corroborated by international treaties that Brazil subscribe”, records the note.
The two entities consider that the changes represent a serious setback in the fight against disinformation, which could compromise democratic advances and achieve fundamental rights in Brazil. “This decision increases the dissemination of false content, which fuels hate speech, prejudice and violence, putting the safety and dignity of LGBTI+ people at risk, in addition to threatening social cohesion.”
The entities also draw attention to the importance of discussions within the Judiciary and Legislative branches. The Federal Supreme Court (STF) is currently judging cases in which it is being discussed whether social networks are responsible for user content if they fail to take the necessary measures to remove posts with criminal content. Furthermore, in the National Congress, the regulation of content on digital platforms is the subject of a bill that became known as PL das Fake News. The National LGBTI+ Alliance and ABRAFH defend the need to approve a legal framework on the subject.
“The absence of specific legislation has allowed companies like Grupo Meta to make arbitrary decisions that are harmful to the public interest, such as ending the checking of fake news and allowing content that pathologizes transgenderism and homosexuality. It is essential that Congress takes over its role in defending democracy, combating disinformation and ensuring that human rights are preserved in virtual environments, through clear regulation and accountability mechanisms. Resistance to disinformation. and hate speech is a commitment that transcends individual interests”, they add.
Pathologization
In the opinion of the president of the LGBT Memory and Truth Working Group, Renan Quinalha, the green light given by Meta to speeches pathologizing LGBTI+ identities is extremely serious. In a post published on Friday (10) on his social networks, Quinalha criticized the announced changes. “For a long time, we were considered not only sinners, by the churches, and criminals, by the States, but also sick. The stigma imposed on us by medical knowledge is one of the deepest, because it has always benefited from the legitimacy and prestige of science. For no other reason, one of our oldest battles has been precisely for depathologization, that is, to avoid this association of LGBTI+ existences with a disease.”
Quinalha cites cases of compulsory hospitalization in psychiatric hospitals and judicial asylums. “We were subjected to violence such as electric shocks, lobotomy, insulin therapy and convulsive therapy. They wrote treaties with photos and diagnoses. They wrote reports and prescribed different treatments. Thanks to a petition started in 1981 in Brazil, our country depathologized homosexuality in 1985. The Organization World Health Organization did so in 1990. Trans existences only in 2018 – and with reservations. Professional bodies such as the federal councils of Medicine and Psychology prohibit these healing therapy practices. gay“, he adds.
However, he notes that this is still a recent achievement in Brazil and that it has not yet been achieved in some countries and warns that, without moderation on the platforms, the removal of pathologizing speeches that are in circulation on social media will only be possible. possible by calling the Judiciary.
“It’s very serious. Because the time taken by Justice is slow. Because it burdens us once again to defend ourselves alone and on our own from attacks. The damage will have already been – and is already being – done. They will go viral memes and false research that classifies us as sick. And a lot of people will believe it. This is how prejudice and discrimination are built. We cannot allow platforms to amplify hate speech with impunity,” he wrote.
Reactions
When announcing changes to Facebook and Instagram rules, Mark Zuckerberg said that the recent election of Donald Trump in the United States is a turning point. He nodded to the new president of the United States, who will take office on the 20th of this month. At the same time, he adopted arguments adopted by Trump and other far-right world leaders, who classify fact-checking as censorship. “It’s time to return to our roots of free expression on Facebook and Instagram,” he said.
Meta’s executive president also accused governments and traditional media outlets of being in favor of censorship.
In recent days, the speech has generated reactions from different heads of state. The presidents of Brazil, Luiz Inácio Lula da Silva, and France, Emmanuel Macron, addressed the topica in a telephone conversation on Friday. The governments of both countries share a similar position and expressed concern about the risk of an increase in the spread of fake news. In Brazil, the Attorney General’s Office (AGU) notified the Goal to clarify doubts within 72 hours. Explanations were also charged by the Federal Public Ministry (MPF), which established, however, a more elastic deadline: 30 days.
On Thursday (9), the spokesperson for the European Commission, Thomas Regnier, defended that the Digital Services Law be respected by Meta. Regnier stated that the legislation does not authorize the removal of legal content from platforms, but rather those that may be harmful to children or the progress of European Union democracies.
In a post on social media, the United Nations (UN) High Commissioner for Human Rights, Volker Türk, stated that allowing hate speech has real-world consequences. “Regulating such content is not censorship. My office calls for responsibility and governance in the digital space, in line with human rights,” he wrote.
