Brazil bans X and joins the global fight against misinformation on social media.

The social network X, formerly known as Twitter, has been the subject of controversy in several countries due to its role in the dissemination of information, and its recent ban in Brazil adds a new chapter to this story. Since last Saturday, the Brazilian government has prohibited the use of the platform, claiming that it contributed to the spread of fake news in a delicate political context. However, Brazil is not alone in its decision, as several countries have imposed similar restrictions over the years, especially those governed by authoritarian regimes. The story of X's ban begins with China, which blocked access to the social network in June 2009, just before the 20th anniversary of the repression of the protests in Tiananmen Square. This preemptive action by the Chinese government took place at a time when Twitter was still relatively unknown worldwide. Since then, Chinese citizens have found alternatives like Weibo and WeChat, adapting to an environment of censorship that has effectively controlled the country's narrative. Control over social media is not exclusive to China. In Central Asia, Turkmenistan has followed a similar approach by restricting access to Twitter and other services since the 2010s. In this country, where internet access is monopolized by the state-owned TurkmenTelecom, government surveillance is constant, drastically limiting access to information not controlled by the authorities. North Korea, another example of extreme control, banned X and other platforms like Facebook and YouTube in 2016. This action aligns with the authoritarian regime that restricts access to information for a small elite, while the rest of the population lives under a strict information control system with few opportunities to access external content. In Myanmar, following the military coup in February 2021, restrictions on X intensified, leading to its total ban in response to mass protests. The military junta has imposed tight control over information, using the ban on the platform to stifle dissent and limit the dissemination of information about the protests. Russia, for its part, has taken severe measures against X, slowing its access since 2021 and officially blocking it in March 2022, just at the onset of the invasion of Ukraine. Despite the restrictions, many Russians have found ways to circumvent the ban using VPN services, evidencing the people's desire to access a platform that allows them to communicate and organize. In Pakistan, authorities have used the argument of national security to justify the ban on X just before the 2024 legislative elections. The dissemination of allegations of electoral fraud through the platform was a key point in the government's decision, highlighting how control of information becomes a crucial tool for those in power. In Latin America, Venezuela has followed a similar path under the administration of Nicolás Maduro, who suspended access to X amid violent protests following the elections. Although the suspension was supposed to be temporary, the reality is that the ban has remained, reflecting the government's need to control the narrative in the face of social discontent. The situation in Brazil, where a Supreme Federal Court judge has blocked X due to the reactivation of accounts that were supposed to remain suspended, shows how control over social media is becoming a hot topic in contemporary politics. The use of severe fines to deter users from attempting to access the platform via VPN is a clear indication of the government's concern over X's influence on public discourse. The ban on X in Brazil, along with the actions of other countries, is generating a global debate about freedom of expression and information control in the digital age. The ability of social media to act as platforms for information and organization is seen as a threat by many governments, leading to the imposition of restrictions and bans in various parts of the world. In this context, the struggle between freedom of expression and state control intensifies, raising difficult questions about the future of access to information in an increasingly interconnected world.