Journalism and radio organizations across Brazil are rejecting a controversial new law that broadens the government’s definition of media workers and could erode working conditions for federally recognized professional journalists.
Nicknamed the “influencer law,” it creates a new “Multimedia Professional” category of workers who produce and distribute content online. President Luiz Inácio Lula da Silva approved law 15.325/2026 in early January.
The legal recognition of a new multimedia professional is likely to benefit large media companies because it may allow them to hire workers at lower wages and with fewer protections than what is typically granted to registered professional journalists, according to Samira de Castro, president of the Brazilian Federation of Journalists (FENAJ for its initials in Portuguese).
That is because, due to the broadstroke nature of the new law, it creates a generic new profession that still has no regulations or rights attached to it. Although it establishes a legal framework, its "all-inclusive" essence, in practice, disrupts labor relations and collective bargaining.
Companies might avoid hiring formally trained journalists or other professionals in favor of these new do-it-all professionals who lack an organic and organized class struggle or rights won after years of labor negotiations.
“The new law creates legal uncertainty,” Castro told LatAm Journalism Review (LJR) in an interview. It “weakens the professions of journalists and radio broadcasters, whose duties often overlap, and exclusively favors business owners in the sector to the detriment of workers.”
Journalist and radio associations as well as digital marketing associations have criticized it, while some industry organizations including the Brazilian Association of Radio and Television Broadcasters (ABERT), came out in favor.
Some legal scholars have said that while the creation of a category of worker may be innovative, the law lacks standards for the newly created profession.
Pedro Rafael Vilella, president of the Brasília Journalist Union, told LJR he was flabbergasted that the law did not establish any technical or ethical requirements.
“In a world where the epidemic of misinformation is disrupting the social fabric and threatening democracies, it is inconceivable that the Brazilian government would authorize this,” he said.
In contrast, ABERT, which defends the media broadcast companies, said the law represents a significant step forward in providing clarity and professional recognition to activities carried out in an environment increasingly marked by media convergence.
The new law “is fully aligned with the technological advances of the communications sector,” Cristiano Lobato, president of ABERT, said in a statement. It “requires professionals to work across disciplines, constantly adapt to technological innovations and continuously update their skills to meet the demands of a constantly changing job market.”
And Brazil’s Communications Ministry in an Instagram post on Jan. 20, which it deleted the following day, said this new legal framework reflected a country that understands that connectivity and national content creation are strategic assets.
“We are not talking about ‘posts,’ but rather a dynamic industry that now enjoys recognition and protection,” the post said.
By the next morning, more than 30 accounts had commented on the post, most of them journalists criticizing the law.
One reply came from Luiz Artur Ferraretto, a professor at Universidade Federal do Rio Grande do Sul, who argued the law mocks traditional professionals in the field of communication and deteriorates work conditions for workers in journalism, advertising and design fields. Ferraretto was stunned Lula sanctioned it without apparent consideration to the academic formation of journalists or input from professional journalism associations, he said.
“A journalist bases their activity on specific techniques and ethics. This stems from knowledge and experience,” Ferraretto said in an interview with LJR. “Without ethical and technical criteria, basing oneself on taste alone, there is no journalism, and information becomes misinformation”.
Reporters like Vicente Medeiros, current head of reporting at Band Rio Grande do Sul, argued the regulation of a “multimedia professional” does not necessarily represent modernization.
“Instead of valuing specialization and quality of information, the text reinforces the logic of the ‘multitool’ journalist, weakens the profession, and, unfortunately, may result in even lower wages and longer working hours,” he told LJR.
Even students in multimedia journalism were vocal against it. “We study, we see the mistakes, we want to improve, but we increasingly realize that we have to do the work of three or four people,” João Pedro Tínel, a student at Universidade Estadual da Bahia, told LJR.
FENAJ and other state associations did a livestream on Jan. 20 to discuss strategies to counter the new law. Thiago Tanji, president of the São Paulo Journalists Union, told LJR the meeting was good for coordinating between several organizations and reaffirmed that journalism is necessary for democracy.
“We are going to need a lot of coordination and dialogue to be able to show that it is indeed necessary to affirm not only journalism, but also the role of journalists as professionals for Brazil and for the world,” Tanji said.
The law is expected to be challenged in court. FENAJ officials said they’re prepared to file lawsuits in individual cases in which they believe journalists’ rights are violated under the new law.
