STAY UP TO DATE: The Effects of the US Foreign Aid Freeze on Freedom House
Expanding Freedom and Democracy
Freedom on the Net 2025

Brazil

Partly Free
65
100
A Obstacles to Access 22 25
B Limits on Content 24 35
C Violations of User Rights 19 40
Last Year's Score & Status
65 100 Partly Free
Scores are based on a scale of 0 (least free) to 100 (most free). See the methodology and report acknowledgements.
Brazil_hero_map

header1 Key Developments, June 1, 2024 – May 31, 2025

Internet freedom remained under strain in Brazil during this coverage period. Complex challenges, including those related to combating false and misleading information, remain in the aftermath of the intensely contested 2022 presidential election between Luiz Inácio Lula da Silva and then incumbent Jair Bolsonaro, and the January 2023 riots in Brasília, in which thousands of Bolsonaro supporters stormed government buildings. Defamation lawsuits and violence in retaliation for online activities pose an ongoing threat to internet users. However, internet access has increased in recent years and the digital divide between rural and urban communities has narrowed, owing in part to several government-backed internet expansion programs.

  • The digital divide in Brazil has narrowed in recent years. Brazil’s Regional Center for Studies on the Development of the Information Society reported in its 2024 ICT Households survey that 85 percent of urban households and 74 percent of rural households had access to the internet, compared to 75 percent of urban households and 51 percent of rural households according to its 2019 survey (A2).1
  • In August 2024, Supreme Court Justice Alexandre de Moraes ordered the blocking of X in Brazil, citing the platform’s failure to appoint a local representative.2 The order was the culmination of a months-long dispute over the platform’s refusal to restrict far-right accounts. Moraes’s order also included a provision threatening fines against those who use censorship circumvention tools, including virtual private networks (VPNs), to access X in Brazil. In October 2024, the block was lifted after X complied with Moraes’s ruling.3 In February 2025, Moraes ordered the blocking of social media platform Rumble for similar reasons,4 and it remained inaccessible at the end of the coverage period (B1 and C4).5
  • The Supreme Court continued to consider the constitutionality of a provision in the Civil Framework of the Internet (Marco Civil da Internet, or Marco Civil) which establishes that internet service providers (ISPs) are only held liable for third-party content if they fail to remove content after a specific court order. By June 2025, after the coverage period, the court had determined that the article shielding providers from liability under such conditions was partly unconstitutional. The judgment significantly modifies intermediary liability in Brazil (B3).6
  • In May 2025, the Supreme Court indicted seven people accused of conducting “strategic disinformation operations” from within the Brazilian Intelligence Agency (ABIN). Their efforts allegedly included targeting the 2022 presidential election as part of a wider coup plot to prevent Lula from taking office, which itself is under investigation (B5).7
  • Users continued to be subject to legal action for their online speech, typically orders to pay damages or perform community service.8 In August 2024, however, the journalist Ricardo Antunes was sentenced by a court in the state of Pernambuco to seven years in prison for slander, defamation, and libel after reporting on his blog about a congressman’s alleged corruption. His appeal remained pending at the end of the coverage period (C3).9
  • Individuals continued to face extralegal retaliation for their online activities, including violence. In November 2024, for instance, José Gonzaga Moreira, a whistleblower who had revealed organized crime activity among the São Paulo police in the 1990s and who recently launched a YouTube channel on which he had denounced various politicians, was murdered by a hit man. The suspect reportedly lured Gonzaga Moreira, popularly known as Zezinho do Ouro, to a meeting by claiming he had information that would be useful for his YouTube program (C7).10

header2 Political Overview

Brazil is a democracy that holds competitive elections. Its political arena, though polarized, is characterized by vibrant public debate. However, independent journalists and civil society activists risk harassment and violent attack and political violence is high. Minority groups suffer from crime, disproportionate violence, and economic exclusion, issues the government struggles to address. Corruption is endemic at top levels, contributing to widespread disillusionment among the public. Societal discrimination and violence against LGBT+ people remain serious problems.

This report has been abridged for Freedom on the Net 2025 due to ongoing budget constraints. Please consider making a donation to support future editions of this vital resource.

For additional background information, see last year’s full report.

A Obstacles to Access

A1 1.00-6.00 pts0-6 pts
Do infrastructural limitations restrict access to the internet or the speed and quality of internet connections? 6.006 6.006

Score Change: The score improved from 5 to 6 because internet penetration rates increased, according to some measurements.1

A2 1.00-3.00 pts0-3 pts
Is access to the internet prohibitively expensive or beyond the reach of certain segments of the population for geographical, social, or other reasons? 2.002 3.003

Score Change: The score improved from 1 to 2 because the digital divide between urban and rural residents has narrowed in recent years.

A3 1.00-6.00 pts0-6 pts
Does the government exercise technical or legal control over internet infrastructure for the purposes of restricting connectivity? 6.006 6.006
A4 1.00-6.00 pts0-6 pts
Are there legal, regulatory, or economic obstacles that restrict the diversity of service providers? 5.005 6.006
A5 1.00-4.00 pts0-4 pts
Do national regulatory bodies that oversee service providers and digital technology fail to operate in a free, fair, and independent manner? 3.003 4.004

B Limits on Content

B1 1.00-6.00 pts0-6 pts
Does the state block or filter, or compel service providers to block or filter, internet content, particularly material that is protected by international human rights standards? 4.004 6.006

Score Change: The score declined from 5 to 4 because X was blocked for several weeks from August to October 2024, limiting people’s ability to express themselves on the platform, and because Rumble was blocked in February 2025.

B2 1.00-4.00 pts0-4 pts
Do state or nonstate actors employ legal, administrative, or other means to force publishers, content hosts, or digital platforms to delete content, particularly material that is protected by international human rights standards? 2.002 4.004
B3 1.00-4.00 pts0-4 pts
Do restrictions on the internet and digital content lack transparency, proportionality to the stated aims, or an independent appeals process? 2.002 4.004
B4 1.00-4.00 pts0-4 pts
Do online journalists, commentators, and ordinary users practice self-censorship? 3.003 4.004
B5 1.00-4.00 pts0-4 pts
Are online sources of information controlled or manipulated by the government or other powerful actors to advance a particular political interest? 2.002 4.004
B6 1.00-3.00 pts0-3 pts
Are there economic or regulatory constraints that negatively affect users’ ability to publish content online? 2.002 3.003
B7 1.00-4.00 pts0-4 pts
Does the online information landscape lack diversity and reliability? 3.003 4.004
B8 1.00-6.00 pts0-6 pts
Do conditions impede users’ ability to mobilize, form communities, and campaign, particularly on political and social issues? 6.006 6.006

C Violations of User Rights

C1 1.00-6.00 pts0-6 pts
Do the constitution or other laws fail to protect rights such as freedom of expression, access to information, and press freedom, including on the internet, and are they enforced by a judiciary that lacks independence? 4.004 6.006
C2 1.00-4.00 pts0-4 pts
Are there laws that assign criminal penalties or civil liability for online activities, particularly those that are protected under international human rights standards? 2.002 4.004
C3 1.00-6.00 pts0-6 pts
Are individuals penalized for online activities, particularly those that are protected under international human rights standards? 2.002 6.006

Score Change: The score declined from 3 to 2 due to a seven-year prison sentence handed down to a journalist in connection with his online reporting.

C4 1.00-4.00 pts0-4 pts
Does the government place restrictions on anonymous communication or encryption? 2.002 4.004
C5 1.00-6.00 pts0-6 pts
Does state surveillance of internet activities infringe on users’ right to privacy? 3.003 6.006
C6 1.00-6.00 pts0-6 pts
Does monitoring and collection of user data by service providers and other technology companies infringe on users’ right to privacy? 4.004 6.006
C7 1.00-5.00 pts0-5 pts
Are individuals subject to extralegal intimidation or physical violence by state authorities or any other actor in relation to their online activities? 1.001 5.005
C8 1.00-3.00 pts0-3 pts
Are websites, governmental and private entities, service providers, or individual users subject to widespread hacking and other forms of cyberattack? 1.001 3.003

On Brazil

See all data, scores & information on this country or territory.

See More

Country Facts

  • Population

    215,300,000

  • Global Freedom Score

    72 100 free

  • Internet Freedom Score

    65 100 partly free

  • Freedom in the World Status

    Free

  • Networks Restricted

    No

  • Websites Blocked

    No

  • Pro-government Commentators

    No

  • Users Arrested

    Yes