The information displayed in the AIM should not be reported as representing the official views of the OECD or of its member countries.
Brazil's Superior Electoral Court (TSE) ordered social media platform X (formerly Twitter) to explain within 24 hours why its recommendation algorithm excluded over 1,500 candidate accounts from visibility during the election, potentially causing illegal electoral imbalance. The TSE demanded transparency, data preservation, and a judicial audit to ensure fair digital campaigning.[AI generated]
Why's our monitor labelling this an incident or hazard?
The event explicitly involves an AI system—the recommendation algorithm on the X platform—that is supposed to exclude candidate profiles from recommendations but appears to be malfunctioning or incomplete. This malfunction could plausibly lead to electoral imbalance by amplifying some candidates unfairly, which is a harm to communities and a violation of electoral fairness laws. Since the article does not confirm that harm has already occurred but highlights the risk and regulatory demand for explanation and compliance, it fits the definition of an AI Hazard. The involvement is through the use and malfunction of the AI system. The event is not a complementary information update or unrelated news, nor is it a beneficial use of AI. Therefore, the correct classification is AI Hazard.[AI generated]