Site icon IHK Solutions

Musk’s X banned in Brazil over misinformation.

Musk's X

Musk's X

Musk’s X app has been banned in Brazil over misinformation. The site RowX, previously known as Twitter, has been blocked in Brazil after failing to meet a Supreme Court judge’s deadline to appoint a new legal representative in the country.

Judge Alexandre de Moraes ordered the “immediate and complete suspension” of the social media platform until it complies with all court orders and pays the current fines.

The conflict started in April when the judge ordered the suspension of several X accounts, accusing them of spreading misinformation. In response, the owner of X, Elon Musk, said, “Freedom of speech is the cornerstone of democracy, and an unelected fake judge in Brazil is destroying it for political purposes.”

As the deadline set by the judge approached, X prepared for the ban in Brazil. The Supreme Court judge in Brazil has opened an investigation into Musk, and X has suspended its operations in Brazil due to the censorship dispute.

It’s said that the social network is used by at least a tenth of the country’s 200 million people. By Saturday morning, some users reported that access to the platform was no longer possible.

X had closed its office in Brazil earlier this month, stating that its representative had been threatened with arrest if she did not comply with what they described as “censorship” orders—orders they also called illegal under Brazilian law.

Judge Moraes had ordered the ban of X accounts accused of spreading misinformation, many of whom were supporters of former right-wing President Jair Bolsonaro, during their investigation. He stated that the company’s legal representatives would be held accountable if any accounts were reactivated.

X was threatened with fines for refusing to comply with this order, and the company, along with Mr. Musk, joined critics in Brazil in accusing the judge of being left-wing.

This is just the latest in a series of controversies involving the tech billionaire, who clashed with the European Union over X’s regulation and earlier this month got involved in a war of words with British Prime Minister Sir Keir Starmer.

The head of Brazil’s communications agency, tasked with suspending the platform, said it was “moving forward in compliance” to do so, according to Reuters.

Judge Moraes gave companies like Apple and Google five days to remove X from their app stores and to block its use on iOS and Android systems. He also added that people or companies using methods like VPNs (virtual private networks) to access the platform could be fined 50,000 Brazilian reais (£6,700).

As per the judge’s order, the ban will continue until X appoints a new legal representative in Brazil and pays the fines for breaking Brazilian law.

In a previous post from one of its official accounts, X said it would not comply with the demands. The post stated, “We anticipate that Judge Alexandre de Moraes will soon order the shutdown of X in Brazil simply because we refuse to comply with his unlawful orders to censor. his political opponents.”

“The core issue at stake here is that Judge de Moraes is demanding we violate Brazilian laws. We simply won’t do that.”

Meanwhile, the bank accounts of Musk’s satellite internet company Starlink have been frozen in Brazil following a previous order from the country’s Supreme Court.

Starlink responded in a post on X, saying that “the order is based on an unfounded decision that Starlink should be held accountable for the fines imposed—unconstitutionally—against X.”

Judge Moraes gained significant recognition after his decisions to restrict social media platforms in the country. He is also investigating Bolsonaro and his supporters for their role in the alleged coup attempt on January 8 of last year.

X is not the first social media company to face pressure from authorities in Brazil. Last year, Telegram was temporarily banned for failing to cooperate with requests to block certain profiles. Meta’s messaging service WhatsApp also faced a temporary ban in 2015 and 2016 for refusing to comply with police requests for user data.

Exit mobile version