The electoral process, as a pillar of a democratic state governed by the rule of law, requires the establishment of rules and principles that guide its full functioning and the manner in which the election should take place.
Among the main nuances involved in the electoral process, we have a constant advancement of technology, whose impact on the success of a campaign is practically immeasurable. However, despite the effective growth in the use of new communication media, new electoral offenses have had to be created, aiming to curb irregular practices during electoral campaigns.
That being said, despite pre-existing legislation, there is much debate regarding the enactment of new rules, whether in amending electoral laws or creating new codes.
In this sense, it is important to understand the challenges faced by legislators and the Superior Electoral Court in structuring new ways to meet constitutional requirements while respecting the principles of electoral law.
II – SOCIAL NETWORKS IN THE ELECTORAL CONTEXT
The topic of using social media as a campaign tool is extremely recent, and it is gaining new facets every day. As such, the Superior Electoral Court issued Resolutions for the 2020, 2022, and 2024 elections, and the National Congress made the latest amendments to the Election Law.
The new legislative landscape was groundbreaking and strengthened the debate about the need to regulate the use of digital platforms as a means of communication between candidates and voters.
Drawing an analogy to the period before the digitalization of society, the political advertising on radio and television was the main form of contact between the candidate and the voter. This tool allowed the candidate to enter the home of that voter, with a scalability and repeatability that was humanly impossible.
With the advent of the internet and social media, contact has become more frequent, occurring at more times of the day and in a targeted manner, due to algorithms.
To better visualize this scenario, according to the 2023 ICT Households survey, 84% of the Brazilian population aged 10 or older connected to the internet, representing approximately 156 million people. In the same survey, 92,6% of respondents reported having used a cell phone in the last 3 (three) months.
In other words, for success in the electoral process, the candidate's participation in digital media, be it TikTok, Instagram, YouTube, or WhatsApp, is indispensable, especially due to the absence of time limits and schedules imposed on free electoral broadcasts.
However, even though it is a positive innovation, the need for balance in the electoral process should guide the relationship between candidates and voters, even through digital means.
II.1 – The difficulty in regulating social networks
The regulation of social media in an electoral context faces several difficulties, mainly due to the rapid evolution of platforms and the complexities of balancing freedom of expression with democratic integrity. Among the difficulties encountered, the following stand out: (i) the subjective aspect of disinformation and fake news; (ii) the responsibility for content moderation; (iii) anonymity, fake accounts, and a sense of impunity; (iv) the risk of irreparable harm; and (v) algorithmic manipulation.
We have five important points for discussion and reflection on screen, which are not easily resolved or overcome.
II.2 – Challenges of Spreading Fake News and Disinformation
The spread of fake news and misinformation is a major concern. Social media allows false information to spread rapidly, which can unduly influence public opinion and election results. Regulating this without harming freedom of expression is challenging.
Furthermore, electoral narrative is essential within an electoral context. However, for content to be characterized as disinformation or knowingly false news, there are subjective elements that influence the interpretation of complaints regarding irregular campaigning.
Regarding content moderation, we have an intersection between electoral regulations and the Brazilian Civil Rights Framework for the Internet . Regulating this matter in an electoral context would require increased responsibility from users and/or platforms.
Platforms are often accused of bias, either by moderating excessively or by not doing enough. The challenge is to find a balance between removing harmful content and ensuring healthy political debate.
Regarding users, the use of anonymous or fake accounts to manipulate political discussions is recurrent, especially through the creation of bots. Often, these accounts are used to spread misinformation or conduct smear campaigns. Regulating the use of anonymous profiles, without infringing on the privacy of legitimate users, is a significant hurdle that has been considered by Congress.
Furthermore, the recurring use of fake accounts, bots, and other illicit tools aimed at constructing a particular narrative on social media generates a sense of impunity regarding crimes committed online.
Thus, based on the analysis of the repeatability and scalability of the dissemination of knowingly false content, we see the possibility of irreparable harm being caused, which clearly has the power to influence the outcome of the elections.
Social media algorithms are designed to maximize engagement, which can end up prioritizing polarizing or misleading content. Understanding and regulating these algorithms, which are often secretive and complex, is a difficult task.
II.3 – Political Polarization as a Pivot in the Spread of Fake News
Combined with social media as a new tool for contact between candidates and voters, the content disseminated has begun to be analyzed from a new perspective: (i) the dissemination of fake news combined with its impact on elections, with the possibility of a right of reply on the political opponent's page; and (ii) the creation and dissemination of deep fakes that cause real imbalance and spread truths created by artificial intelligence.
Based on this, political/ideological polarization further intensifies the spread of false news, as well as truths created by technological tools.
According to Levitsky and Ziblatt, in their work "How Democracies Die," polarization is a serious threat to civility, with the real potential to destroy democracies.
Polarization can destroy democratic norms. When socioeconomic, racial, and religious differences give way to extreme sectarianism—a situation in which societies are divided into political camps whose worldviews are not only different but mutually exclusive—it becomes difficult to sustain tolerance.
Coupled with democratic risk, in Giuseppe Empoli's theory, as outlined in his book "Engineers of Chaos," indignation, fear, prejudice, insult, and racist controversy spread and generate much more attention and engagement on social media.
Dealing with the phenomenon of polarization requires deep reflection on the emotions caused by the use of social media by its users, who are also sometimes voters. With this in mind, we can affirm that conspiracy theories can stem from fear, apprehension, or a need for a sense of social belonging.
The spread of knowingly false news intensifies with the creation of deepfake software , which creates altered images, videos, and audios that convey facts that never occurred.
In this respect, the police power to be exercised by the Public Authority is further refined, requiring the technical expertise of any expert analysis, as well as the necessary agility to curb the illicit practice, halting any effects so that they do not become irreparable.
III – CONCLUSION
As we have observed, the eventual regulation of social networks gives rise to a profound debate about the following main points: (i) the subjective aspect of the content to be moderated; (ii) the responsibility of the platforms; (iii) means that enable the effective punishment of those responsible for spreading fake news, even those who use fake accounts and bots; and (iv) ways to avoid irreparable damage and manipulation of the social media algorithm.
From this perspective, we must already have a forward-looking view, beginning to reflect on deep fakes and the use of artificial intelligence as a way to promote the spread of fake news and distort the electoral landscape.
BIBLIOGRAPHIC REFERENCES
EMPOLI, Giuliano da. The Engineers of Chaos . Translation: Arnaldo Bloch. Vestígio, 2019
LEVITSKY, Steven; ZIBLATT, Daniel. how democracies dieTranslation by Renato Aguiar. Rio de Janeiro: Zahar, 2018, p. 115.
ICT Households 2023 Individuals. Information and Coordination Center of Ponto BR (NIC.br), 2023. Available at: https://cetic.br/pt/arquivos/domicilios/2023/individuos/
