President Luiz Inácio Lula da Silva addresses supporters during a victory rally. Natacha Pisarenko/AP
On October 25, Brazil stunned the world by decisively rejecting the far right and reelecting President Luiz Inácio Lula da Silva for a fourth term. Lula, 81, defeated Flávio Bolsonaro—the son of former President Jair Bolsonaro, who was convicted of attempting a coup—by a margin of more than 4 million votes. He managed to achieve an unprecedented comeback in the runoff of what was considered a critical election not only for the country, but also for the future of the Amazon and the Trump administration’s aspirations in Latin America.
In the aftermath of Lula’s win, Flávio refused to concede, declared himself the rightful “president-elect” (later changing it to “leader of Brazil”), and emulated his father by fleeing to the United States with the assistance of President Donald Trump’s aides. Lula’s election put a halt to the wave of right-wing governments sweeping the region. In his victory speech, the Workers’ Party leader said his election was a win against “outside interference” from companies like Meta—owner of Instagram, Facebook, and WhatsApp—and vowed to regulate digital platforms.
For David Nemer, an associate professor at the University of Virginia who researches technology and disinformation, Lula’s triumph over Flávio also meant that Brazil broke what he described as the “two-year American curse”—a seesawing cycle of about 10 years during which what happened in US politics was later repeated in Brazil, from the rise of a populist far-right leader to anti-democratic riots and efforts to overturn election results.
As we all know, in 2016, Trump won the presidency in the United States. Two years later, Jair Bolsonaro—dubbed the “Trump of the tropics”—came to power in Brazil. Then, Joe Biden became president, followed by Lula’s win two years later. Two years also separated the January 6 insurrection and the January 8, 2023 ransacking of federal of government buildings in Brasilia, the country’s capital, by Bolsonaro supporters. Finally, in 2024, Trump was reelected. But now, faced with the option to return a member of the Bolsonaro family to the nation’s highest office, the majority of Brazilians said “no.”
I first interviewed Nemer in 2023, in the aftermath of the January 6-like attack in Brazil, which he had seen coming. After Flávio’s defeat, I got back in touch with him to ask about how Lula was able to turn the election around in three weeks, what lessons can be learned from the success of his digital campaign, and whether his victory might indicate anything regarding the midterms.
The 2026 Brazilian presidential elections were marked by questions around interference from the United States and claims of political bias by big tech. Lula’s campaign complained that Meta used algorithms to suppress his content while boosting that of his opponent, prompting the Brazilian electoral court to order the company to ensure both candidates received equal treatment on its platforms. What is your assessment of the role that Meta allegedly played in the elections?
Meta deliberately acted in Brazil’s elections. Lula’s content was not going viral. It did not have the same treatment by the algorithm as content shared by the right. People were going to Meta AI, and they were not able to produce any images with Lula’s name on them, but they were able to do it with Flávio’s. Meta recognized the issue and fixed the glitch. It was also more expensive for Lula’s campaign to publish their ads on Meta’s platforms than for Flávio Bolsonaro. [The company has denied meddling in the election.]
While they called them “technical” failures, it’s hard to believe them when there’s no way to verify that those failures were actually just technical—and the fact that all the failures benefited one candidate only, Flávio Bolsonaro. At the same time, one of the main factors behind Lula turning the tide and winning the runoff was actually WhatsApp, which is a platform owned by Meta. WhatsApp is on 98 percent of phones in Brazil; it’s the main means of communication.
Initially, the race looked neck and neck, and after the first round of voting on October 4, Flávio Bolsonaro appeared to have a clear advantage. What were the crucial factors that enabled President Lula’s historic comeback?
Lula changed his strategy and aligned himself with folks who understood the digital world. For example, 21-year-old Ana Elisa Santos—she’s a Black woman who got elected [to Congress] in the state of Minas Gerais. She was a massive phenomenon, and he got her on his team. There were also political wins that helped boost Lula, like the bill that became law ending the six-day workweek. That was a major win for Lula, and he capitalized a lot on that. He also banned online gambling platforms, which was something that people were really concerned about.
“One thing was building on another and the momentum was created until we saw what we saw in the runoff. There was also just a lot of fear of going back to the Bolsonaro times.”
All these political and digital moves helped him gain momentum. He made these moves to occupy the digital world, but there were also several organizers who worked together to occupy the streets. That was very important. It started with law students in Niterói [in the state of Rio de Janeiro] and the next thing we know, we’re seeing Lula take over Copacabana—known for pro-Bolsonaro demonstrations—and the city of São Paulo’s main avenue. One thing was building on another and the momentum was created until we saw what we saw in the runoff. There was also just a lot of fear of going back to the Bolsonaro times.
The main person responsible for Lula’s successful strategy online was lawmaker André Janones, the “general” behind a WhatsApp channel that grew to have more than 10 million members. He instructed followers not to engage with content from the right so as to not boost its reach. He also developed targeted “missions,” for example, encouraging followers to post selfies wearing Brazil’s soccer jersey and flashing a pro-Lula “L” sign that flooded social media feeds. Can you explain how the Janonismo digital campaign worked in this election?
What [André] Janones did was what I have theorized as the human infrastructure of WhatsApp. I’ve studied this in the context of misinformation and how the Bolsonaro campaign in 2018 built a human infrastructure to behave just like an algorithm on WhatsApp—to curate and distribute misinformation. That’s exactly what Janones did. Instead of having a platform that relies on algorithms—where we don’t know how the content reaches us—he created a human infrastructure that would promote the content that needed to be spread.
He started this channel called “Exército do Lula”—Lula’s Army—and kept giving people tasks. You have the influencer, and he’s got the troops that will go out and follow his orders. “Hey, bring your friend, bring your cousin, bring your mom, bring the people you know.” People are more likely to believe in things that are shared by those they know and trust. So that was a big change: to make [a network] more intimate, but also at scale.
After his loss, Flávio Bolsonaro fled to the United States, and the US government gave him temporary permission to stay in the country. Several Democrats have pushed back, pointing to it as another example of “Trump’s corruption.” Do you think Lula’s victory in Brazil could contribute to the Democrats’ momentum in the upcoming US midterms?
Lula’s win certainly brings a breath of fresh air. I think it helps more than it hurts the Democrats. It sends a message that the far right is not inevitable. You actually can beat them. Everything was leaning toward Bolsonaro winning following what Trump did two years ago. But Brazil broke the two-year curse. This could send a message to Democrats and be a way to get Americans to look and think, “Hey, things can change.”
This conversation has been edited for length and clarity.
