Why has X been banned in Brazil? | The Daily Aus

Is this the beginning of the end for X? This week, X was banned in Brazil due to a Supreme Court decision over what can and can’t be said online. It is the latest in a string of lawsuits and bad news engulfing X. Although, X itself paints a different picture. So, about two years on from when billionaire Elon Musk took over the ownership of X, what is happening to it and what does it’s future look like? We’ll take a look in today’s episode.

Hosts: Zara Seidler and Billi FitzSimons
Producer: Orla Maher

Want to listen to more episodes of The Daily Aus' podcast? Follow us:

Or check out our other platforms here:

Note: Captions are auto-generated

#news #podcast #thedailyaus

[MemeseMicos]

Brazil is a democratic nation where you can freely express your opinions, as long as you don't cross the line into offending others—such as through racism or homophobia. This contrasts with the USA, where people sometimes express racist or homophobic views without facing significant consequences. In Brazil, racism and homophobia are classified as hate crimes, leading to legal repercussions including imprisonment. Free speech is important, but it must have boundaries to prevent the spread of hatred.

[mimicbox]

It is so heartwarming to see many brazillians in the comments clarifying the situation

[phnv]

This has little to do with freedom of speech - although it was a trigger, it is a matter of national sovereignty: Imagine a brazilian company is the USA, imagine it starts disobeying american laws, spreading false information and even messing with local elections, imagine its brazilian owner starts making accusations against the american Supreme Court offending the judges. What do you think would happen to this guy and his company?

American business men having their business jeopardized in a latin american country, than calling it a dictatorship is the oldest tale in the book. We know how it starts, we know how it ends. It is the pre room of economic sanctions and interventions. This asymmetry is called imperialism, and if Australia and the EU don't watch it the Big Techs will make these countries their bitches too. One more thing: Musk is also using his Starlink satellites to search lithium mines in the amazon, so ... sleep with that.

[OKingSizeTv]

It is important to point out that freedom of speech is enshrined in the brazilian constitution on article 5. However, like much of the rest of the world there are limits to freedom of speech pertaining to hate speech and misinformation. Unlike the u.s, spreading nazi ideology, being openly racist, or mass broadcasting election misinformation (for example) are crimes as determined Brazil's penal code. This is not about free speech but about X desregarding brazilian law.

[jotani]

Just a correction it wasn't banned, it was blocked. As soon as X designed a legal representative person/company, X will be unblocked. Elon just need to follow brazilian laws.

[israel_should_not_exist]

What about US ban of RT and TikTok? Im waiting a video about how banning TikTok, RT and shut down pro Palestinian content is related to US free speech.

[Caio-fisd]

Freedom of expression is different from hate speech.

[Gimlet]

These days, disinformation on social media causes unnecessary social conflicts, requiring tremendous efforts to resolve. While freedom of speech is an important human right, those who spread misinformation or engage in hate speech must be held accountable.

[fandoaow]

I would like to add a correction to some comments here: Twitter is suspended, not banned from the country. It may resume operating in Brazil as soon as it complies with court orders.
Personally, I find it curious that the coutries whose authority he questions (Australia, England and Brazil) all have recently elected left-leaning leaders. He has no problem sensoring posts in countries like Turkey, India, Saudi Arabia - ruled by right-wing leaders where oppositionists are actually jailed for tweets, or worse.

[HenriqueCSJ]

Let’s hope so! (I am from Brazil).
But seriously, all social media platforms should be held accountable for their content. They profit from the content, so it is just fair.
Fortunately, not all countries operate under the same premise as the USA. The "freedom of speech at all costs" motto can be quite destructive because some people simply want to see the world burn, while others are just too dumb.
Freedom is an amazing gift, but there should be limits when one’s freedom harms others.

[RudahXimenes]

Remember: freedom of speech is not the same as freedom of hatred. What Musk is trying to defend is freedom of hatred.

[rogeriopenna]

Actually, the Brazilian X directors were under arrest risk because X was not complying with the Supreme Court orders.

Then X fired everybody and closed the Brazilian offices.


However, social media platforms are required by Brazilian law to have representatives in Brazil.

So the moment X had no representatives in Brazil, it was illegal to operate in the country.

The judge have a deadline for X to appoint a representative in Brazil, which it declined to do.

[CirculoPro]

The legal representative was fired, Ellon fired and closed the office in brazil. A company cant be operating without a representative in brazil.

[BrenoPires]

you keep talking about free speech first, but its literally crimes. If it is a crime then its not free speech, they are dealing with crimes, not free speech, its very different the way you guys are putting it like that. Free speech its you critiize a government and saying what is wrong and what could be done, free speech its not organizing riots to take over power and destroy the supreme court, threaten with death, destroying buildings... can you see the difference?

[solidv]

Free speech is not freedom to commit crimes.

[francechou]

Well, banned is a hard word. It has been suspended until the company complies with court rullings. People are saying that the government "banned" the social network. But government has not done so. In fact there is separation of Power and this is a legal matter.

[rogeriopenna]

Freedom of speech is enshrined in many countries. But all countries, including the US, have different definitions of what constitutes freedom of speech. There is no universal definition.

[elvisrodrigues]

No company can operate in our country without being in accordance to our legislation.

[davidmaisel]

X is a lost cause, and the banks are left holding the bag.

[flaviomattosrio]

There is an aspect that may be overlooked: Brazilian law, specifically the so-called "Marco Civil da Internet" (Law 12.965 of 2014), requires internet providers to have a representative on Brazilian soil in order to operate. By closing his office in Brazil, Elon Musk voluntarily puts himself in a position of being unable to operate, while also attempting to avoid paying debts to the Brazilian government. In fact, this last point was what enabled the enforcement of legislation affecting Starlink. In Brazil, companies in the same "de facto economic group, " meaning with the same controlling entity, are jointly liable for debts owed to the state and other creditors. It is worth noting that Brazilian employees laid off by X complained that not all severance payments required by Brazilian law were fully paid, at least initially.

The democratic Brazilian government has effective means to handle claims and disagreements, which do not involve disobedience to laws or judicial decisions.