By Margaret Janelle R. Hutchinson
Impunity Watch Reporter, South America
BRASÍLIA, Brazil – As a young, vibrant, democratic nation, it seems counterintuitive that Brazil would be a leader in digital censorship. Brazil submitted 418 requests, more than any other country, to block or remove content from Google’s various servers last year.
Attempts to censor content were elevated to another level last week when a judge ordered the arrest of Google’s most senior executive in Brazil, Fabio Jose Silva Coelho, after the company failed to take down YouTube videos attacking a local mayoral candidate.
A different Brazilian judge ordered Google to remove versions of the “Innocence of the Muslims” video that has sparked deadly riots across the Middle East from Brazilian YouTube within 10 days or face fines.
The cases are reviving a debate about Brazilian laws that hold services such as YouTube responsible for the videos posted on them, making the country a hotbed of attempts to stifle digital content.
Brazilian law currently treats content on the internet like material in newspapers, television and radio. Consequently, Google is considered responsible for user posted material.
Brazil carefully monitors racial issues and has strict electoral laws that limit criticism of candidates in the run-up to elections. There are lawsuits in at least 20 of its 26 states seeking deletion of Google content. The video that drew controversy last week aired paternity claims against a mayoral candidate in Campo Grande, a state capital in Brazil’s interior.
Google says it resists restrictions it regards as illegitimate but complies with lawful requests from government officials. The company appealed the ruling in the Campo Grande case but blocked the video after the court rejected the appeal and police arrested Coelho.
“Our goal with YouTube is to offer a community that everyone can enjoy and, at the same time, is a platform for freedom of expression worldwide,” Coelho said in a blog post after his brief detention. “This is a great challenge, mainly because content acceptable in one country may be offensive — or even illegal — in others.”
Many Brazilians criticized the government’s handling of the Campo Grande case and what they see as elevating the rights of political candidates over the free-speech rights of their constituents.
“It’s a step back in terms of freedom of expression, something like we see happening in countries like China,” said Monica Rosina, professor at Fundaçao Getulio Vargas Law School. “It’s bad for the Brazilian image abroad.”
In the video case, the judge said Google would be fined 10,000 Brazilian reais ($4,926) per day if it doesn’t comply with his order. Still, the judge acknowledged the complexity of policing videos on YouTube.
There is pending legislation in Brazil that would provide some protection for intermediaries such as Google. The legislation, known as Marco Civil, would not fully prevent the kind of case that resulted in Coelho’s arrest, which was brought under Brazil’s more specific electoral laws.
Maria Clara Garcaz, a 20-year-old university student in Rio de Janeiro, expressed worries about the court action.
“It’s like we live in a silent, disguised dictatorship. When we had our real dictatorship, at least you knew for certain what you could and couldn’t say,” Garcaz said. “Political speech can be censored at any time and it’s moving into the Internet, exactly where people speak out.”
For further information, please see:
The Independent – Governments in young democracies fret over social media – 4 October 2012
PKKH – Google’s Brazil Chief Detained; Court Bans Anti-Islam Video – 27 September 2012
Yahoo Finance – Arrest of Google Brazil head stirs debate over Web – 27 September 2012
The Guardian – Google executive in Brazil faces arrest over video – 25 September 2012
