The Invisible Hand of Big Tech in Brazil
This article is part of the project “The Invisible Hand of Big Tech,” led by Agência Pública and El Centro Latinoamericano de Investigación Periodística (CLIP), featuring the involvement of 15 other organizations, including Tech Policy Press, across 13 countries. Read more about the project and find other articles in the series here.
A Powerful Lobbying Machine
Over the last decade, major technology firms have strategically built robust government relations teams in Brazil. This maneuvering has birthed an effective lobbying system, adept at thwarting regulatory measures contrary to their interests in Congress. A recent data investigation by Núcleo uncovered a considerable network of 75 government relations professionals employed by 15 significant tech companies, all pivotal in engaging with both the Executive and Legislative branches of government.
The Revolving Door Phenomenon
Interestingly, two out of every three of these professionals have previous experience within government entities such as ministries, legislatures, or regulatory agencies, exemplifying what is commonly termed the “revolving door” phenomenon. This practice raises questions about the potential conflicts of interest and the implications of a workforce that straddles both corporate and governmental roles.
About half of these professionals entered their positions between 2021 and 2023, coinciding with intense advocacy around major regulations like Bill 2630/2020, the so-called Fake News Bill. Despite some initial support from lawmakers and civil society, the bill was ultimately declared “dead” in 2024 by Arthur Lira, the then President of Brazil’s House of Representatives.
Data Collection Methodology
The data for this lobbying investigation was meticulously gathered through extensive LinkedIn searches, utilizing a social media research method known as snowball sampling. This method enabled the identification of specific professional profiles through the platform’s recommendation algorithms. Only individuals explicitly self-identifying as part of public policy or government relations teams were included in the dataset, revealing a first-ever publicly available investigation of this magnitude in Brazil.
Lurking Influences Behind Regulations
It’s essential to note that the figures presented reflect only direct hires from the tech companies themselves. They do not account for lobbyists affiliated with various organizations, including the Digital Council, funded by major tech players, as well as other advocacy groups focused on digital economy issues.
The investigation also discovered a notable presence of lobbyists from other sectors, such as oil, mining, and banking. At least eleven lobbyists with backgrounds in these industries have transitioned into tech lobbying roles, illustrating a cross-pollination of tactics and strategies across industries.
Pressure Behind the Scenes
Interviews conducted with insiders who were part of negotiations surrounding Bill 2630 provided a deeper understanding of these lobbyists’ influence. Those engaged in the discussions reveal how tech company lobbyists not only leveraged their experience but also pressured major national confederations unrelated to technology to influence the bill’s trajectory.
An anecdotal recount of negotiations regarding the construction of data centers underscores a palpable “quid pro quo,” with various exchanges and incentives being proffered to sway decision-making.
The Scale of Corporate Advocacy
Meta has emerged as the frontrunner in terms of the number of employees dedicated to public policy or government relations in Brazil, with at least 19 professionals in these roles. Trailing closely behind is Google, which employs around 10 professionals, a number that swells to 13 when including YouTube staff.
Both companies engaged aggressively against the Fake News Bill, employing extensive tactics to obstruct the legislation. Google notably enlisted former Brazilian President Michel Temer to act as an emissary in Brasília, all while running a prominent blog post against the bill on its homepage—actions that subsequently prompted investigations by Brazilian authorities.
Meta wasn’t far behind, placing full-page advertisements in major newspapers and undertaking extensive advertising campaigns at Brazilian airports to sway public opinion against the bill.
The Evolution of Lobbying
Rafael Zanatta, a researcher and director at Data Privacy Brasil, expresses that the evolution of tech lobbying in Brazil has marked a shift from singular focus on tax-related issues to a more comprehensive strategy aimed at influencing regulatory frameworks, especially regarding privacy and data protection.
The initial discussions surrounding the General Data Protection Law, or LGPD, back in 2015 saw companies mobilizing resources to derail any legislative efforts that could constrain their operations. Although the LGPD was ultimately enacted in August 2018, the lobbying efforts have not only continued but expanded in scope and intensity.
The Regulatory Landscape Debate
One of the critical challenges highlighted by Zanatta is the absence of formal lobbying regulations in Brazil. The lack of a clear definition and structure for lobbying creates a murky environment where questionable practices can proliferate. Unlike in some countries, where certain lobbying activities are regulated, Brazil’s landscape remains largely unregulated, allowing both ethical and unethical practices to go unchecked.
Andressa Michelotti, a political science doctoral candidate at the Federal University of Minas Gerais, comments on the broader implications of Brazil’s regulatory decisions. If legislation akin to the Fake News Bill were to pass in Brazil, it could set a precedent for similar regulations in other countries, particularly in the Global South.
Activism and Advocacy in the Shadows
Experts like Bia Barbosa from Reporters Without Borders emphasize the unprecedented level of lobbying activity aimed at stifling regulatory measures in Brazil. This lobbying not only involves direct actions but also reflects an organized, almost international effort to constrain legislative movements in technology regulation.
The combined pressures from big tech highlight the stakes involved, as companies mobilize their resources and connections to secure favorable outcomes that not only shape Brazilian law but potentially influence decision-making on a global scale.