FREEDOM OF EXPRESSION AND HATE SPEECH ON SOCIAL MEDIA FROM A CONSTITUTIONAL PERSPECTIVE

Abstract

This article analyzes the normative conflict between freedom of expression and hate speech on social media from the perspective of the 1988 Brazilian Federal Constitution, investigating the constitutional limits for freedom of thought in the digital environment. Given the absence of specific typification of hateful conduct in the Brazilian legal system, the study examines how the State, the Judiciary, and digital platforms balance apparently antagonistic fundamental rights—the free manifestation of thought and human dignity— through Robert Alexy's theory of balancing. The methodology adopted is qualitative and descriptive, employing a critical bibliographic review of legal doctrine, jurisprudence from the Supreme Federal Court (STF), and analysis of the moderation policies of major digital platforms. It was found that, although freedom of expression constitutes a pillar of the Democratic State of Law, it was never conceived as an absolute right, operating instead within a logic of practical concordance with other constitutionally protected legal goods. The private governance of expression by social networks reveals itself as ambiguous, with opaque criteria for algorithmic moderation that frequently remove lawful content while maintaining discriminatory speech. It is concluded that overcoming this impasse requires a hybrid model combining informed self-regulation by platforms, proportional state supervision, and media literacy, always respecting the canons of due process of law and proportionality, thereby avoiding the false dilemma between absolute freedom and state censorship.