Meta employees said Lula's accounts were hindered during Brazil election

Commenters debated whether revelations that Meta hindered Lula’s accounts show real bias or are just technical problems. throwa356262 and seatac76 treated the report as vindication of previously-dismissed theories and rejected explanations that it was a bug. elmer2 pointed out similar actions against Trump and argued for rules preventing big tech from intervening in politics, warning against partisan double standards. jcz_nz urged others to read the reporting as documentation of issues, while bradishungry and watwut invoked the broader context of Bolsonaro and accusations of attempted coups.

Opinion split sharply over where blame lies and what should follow. Matheusmoreira argued the real problem is alleged systematic censorship by Brazil’s supreme court since 2019, claimed the judiciary had usurped power, and called for impeaching and jailing judges while predicting a right‑wing comeback. Others, exemplified by amazingman, condemned that response as “21st century fascism” and criticized calls to punish judges and overthrow institutions. The debate centered on whether platform interference equals partisan bias, whether judicial actions against the right justify radical retaliation, and whether uniform legal limits on tech firms are the right remedy.