Brazilian singer Anitta has taken legal action against television presenter Luiz Bacci following a series of controversial statements about her personal life, career and political opinions, escalating a public disagreement that began during Brazil’s 2026 presidential election campaign. The lawsuit became public on Monday, October 19, after reports revealed that the singer’s legal representatives had requested the immediate removal of videos containing sexually explicit comments made by Bacci during his online program, Show do Bacci.
The dispute emerged shortly after Anitta publicly announced her support for President Luiz Inácio Lula da Silva in his reelection campaign against Senator Flávio Bolsonaro, placing the internationally recognized artist at the center of another heated political discussion in Brazil. According to information first reported by journalist Nelson Lima Neto in Ancelmo Gois’s column for O Globo, Anitta is seeking compensation for moral and material damages, although the amount of her potential financial claim had not been established when the lawsuit was reported.
The controversy developed over several days in October, beginning with Anitta’s decision to openly discuss her political position and continuing through multiple public statements made by Bacci. During one of his broadcasts, the presenter responded to the singer’s criticism of Bolsonaro supporters by making an explicit sexual reference to one of her stage performances. The remarks quickly attracted attention from Brazilian entertainment outlets, particularly because they involved a well-known television journalist discussing a female artist’s body while criticizing her political views. Further comments directed at Anitta and her fans intensified the disagreement, while the presenter later defended his statements and expressed surprise that the singer had decided to pursue legal action. The situation has since raised questions about the limits of public criticism, the responsibility of media personalities when discussing celebrities and the legal consequences of personal attacks made through digital platforms.
Anitta’s involvement in the controversy began with a video published on Instagram on October 9, in which she confirmed that she would vote for Lula in the second round of the presidential election scheduled for October 25. The singer explained that she had initially expected the current president to win the election during the first round and admitted that she had underestimated the continued political influence of the Bolsonaro family. Her comments followed an unexpectedly competitive first round in which Flávio Bolsonaro received 47.03% of the valid votes, compared with Lula’s 45.16%. During the recording, Anitta expressed concern about what she described as the growing influence of religious extremism, political misinformation and aggressive communication strategies associated with bolsonarismo, while arguing that traditional conservative politics should be distinguished from the movement surrounding former president Jair Bolsonaro. She also criticized political discussions designed primarily to generate outrage and attract attention on social media, suggesting that controversial subjects were frequently used to influence voters. Her endorsement attracted considerable attention almost immediately, with Poder360 reporting that the Instagram video had accumulated approximately 6.5 million views within an hour of publication.
The singer also addressed the reasons behind her support for Lula, acknowledging that his administration had faced criticism while emphasizing the importance she attributed to social programs and policies intended to improve opportunities for economically disadvantaged Brazilians. Anitta discussed her previous political involvement and said that supporting causes she considers important has remained part of her public identity throughout her career. She mentioned her opposition to online betting platforms, her support for changing Brazil’s traditional six-day work schedule, and her advocacy for women, Indigenous communities, environmental protection and religious freedom. Her remarks also reflected a complicated relationship with political endorsements, particularly because she had previously indicated that she would avoid recording another direct campaign message after facing criticism from fans. Reports published on October 9 explained that she eventually reconsidered, making her preference explicit while defending her right to participate in political discussions. Anitta had also supported Lula during the 2022 presidential election, when she publicly opposed Jair Bolsonaro’s reelection campaign.
The statements soon attracted the attention of Luiz Bacci, who discussed Anitta’s political intervention on his digital program, Show do Bacci. According to a report published by BNews on October 10, the presenter reacted particularly strongly to the singer’s suggestion that Bolsonaro supporters frequently exploit controversial subjects to achieve greater visibility online. During the broadcast, Bacci brought up footage of a previous Anitta performance involving a man onstage and used the images to question what he perceived as an inconsistency between her criticism of attention-seeking political content and her own artistic presentations. His argument quickly moved into sexually explicit territory when he referred to the male participant appearing close to the singer’s intimate area. Among the statements reported by the Brazilian press was his claim that she had placed a man onstage who appeared to be performing a sexual act on her. Bacci repeatedly referred to the performance while asking why Anitta considered provocative content unacceptable when employed by political opponents. The footage became central to the subsequent lawsuit, with the singer’s representatives seeking to have the presenter’s comments removed from circulation.
The choice of language was one of the most controversial aspects of Bacci’s response. During his remarks, he used the vulgar Portuguese expression “xereca”, referring to the singer’s genital area, and questioned whether her stage performance was comparable to the provocative communication tactics she had criticized. Reports covering the broadcast reproduced his statement that Anitta had placed a man onstage who was almost performing oral sex on her, followed by questions challenging her political argument. The presenter appeared to frame the performance as evidence that the artist herself relied on sexually provocative situations to attract attention. However, the reports available about the episode do not establish that the sexual act described by Bacci actually occurred, and his characterization of the performance should therefore be understood as his own interpretation of the footage. The disagreement over the images and the language he used became particularly important after Anitta decided to challenge the publication of the remarks through the courts.
The dispute continued beyond that initial broadcast. On October 14, entertainment journalist Fagner Vilela reported for iG that Bacci had once again criticized Anitta, this time while responding to online speculation about his own sexuality and comments attributed to the singer’s fans. During the program, Bacci dismissed the opinions of her supporters, called them politically uninformed and made another statement concerning sexual relationships and professional success. He claimed that he had achieved his position without needing to sleep with other people, a remark interpreted by several entertainment outlets as a sexual insinuation directed at Anitta. The presenter also defended the privacy of his personal relationships while addressing the speculation circulating about him online. His comments then moved toward the singer’s musical abilities, with Bacci claiming that Anitta could not sing well and comparing her unfavorably with Brazilian singer Sandy, whom he considered a superior vocalist. These statements expanded the confrontation to include Anitta’s professional reputation, her supporters and questions about the way she had developed her career.
The disagreement between the two public figures also had a connection to an earlier controversy involving Brazil’s online betting industry. Bacci had previously questioned Anitta’s opposition to betting platforms, arguing that she had participated in performances allegedly sponsored by companies operating in the sector. The presenter accused the singer of inconsistency and suggested that public figures who oppose betting should avoid accepting financial support connected to the industry. These accusations were part of Bacci’s criticism, and the reports reviewed do not independently establish the sponsorship arrangements he described. He made similar comments about television personality Ana Paula Renault, winner of Big Brother Brasil 26, after she criticized betting companies despite participating in a reality show sponsored by Betano. Bacci questioned whether she should retain prize money associated with a program receiving financial support from the gambling industry. The earlier exchanges provide additional context for the presenter’s criticism of Anitta, showing that disagreements involving her public positions had already become material for his online broadcasts before the lawsuit became public.
Anitta’s legal representatives had submitted a request for an injunction seeking the immediate removal of the offensive material from the internet. The request specifically concerned videos and statements published by Bacci, with the singer’s legal team seeking to prevent their continued distribution while the broader dispute proceeds. Reports also indicated that the action included claims for moral and material damages, although the financial amount had yet to be determined. The request for immediate removal is significant because an injunction can potentially provide relief before the court reaches a final decision on liability and compensation. The available reporting did not establish that a judge had already granted the request or that Bacci had been ordered to remove the material, making it important to distinguish the measures sought by Anitta from any decision that might eventually be issued by the court.
The distinction between moral and material damages is also relevant to understanding the lawsuit. Under Brazilian law, claims involving moral damages can concern harm to a person’s dignity, honor, reputation or other legally protected personal interests, while claims for material damages involve financial losses that may need to be demonstrated through evidence. Article 5 of Brazil’s Federal Constitution protects freedom of expression while also recognizing the rights to privacy, honor and personal image, along with compensation for violations of those rights. These protections can become particularly important when a disagreement involves a media personality and a well-known artist whose professional reputation is closely connected to her public image. In Anitta’s case, the court may eventually have to assess the content and context of Bacci’s statements, the nature of the criticism, and whether the publications created legally recognizable harm. Such an assessment would also need to consider protections for journalistic commentary and political expression. The outcome cannot be determined simply from the fact that the remarks were controversial, especially when the presenter’s defense maintains that he was discussing material from a public performance.
Bacci publicly addressed the legal dispute on the afternoon of October 19, speaking directly to journalist Lucas Pasin of Metrópoles. The presenter said he had been surprised by news of the lawsuit and maintained that his statements accurately described the performance he had discussed. He also criticized Anitta’s decision to take the matter to court, arguing that legal disputes of this nature could interfere with the judicial system’s ability to address other cases. Bacci maintained that he had spoken truthfully and indicated that he was prepared to have the disagreement evaluated by a judge. His response showed that he had no intention of immediately withdrawing his interpretation of the performance simply because the singer had filed a lawsuit. The interview was an important development because it established his public position after the legal action became known, giving a clearer picture of how both sides approached the confrontation. While Anitta’s legal representatives were attempting to restrict the circulation of the material and pursue financial compensation, Bacci was defending his right to describe the performance as he understood it.
The political setting surrounding the controversy makes the timing especially significant. Anitta’s October 9 endorsement came during a particularly competitive presidential campaign, with Lula attempting to secure another term while Flávio Bolsonaro sought to defeat him in the October 25 runoff. Her decision to speak publicly was widely covered because of her enormous social media following and previous involvement in political debates. In the endorsement video, Anitta argued that political discussion should include questions about democracy, public policy, social inequality and the treatment of minority communities. She also addressed the role of religious language in electoral campaigning, claiming that some political movements were using faith and controversial subjects to mobilize supporters. Bacci’s response concentrated heavily on her criticism of engagement-driven political communication, using her stage performance as a comparison. The disagreement therefore developed directly from contrasting opinions about political messaging, although the statements that prompted the lawsuit were principally concerned with the singer’s body and public performances.
Another issue receiving attention is the way artistic performances are discussed when celebrities participate in political debates. Anitta has built an internationally recognized career that includes choreography, elaborate stage productions and performances incorporating sexually suggestive imagery, elements that have frequently been discussed in coverage of her music and public persona. Bacci’s criticism relied on a particular performance to challenge her views about political publicity, while the subsequent legal dispute concerns the language and implications of his description. The distinction may be important in court because commentary about publicly available artistic material can raise different legal questions from statements implying misconduct or attacking someone’s personal reputation. The court would need to consider the complete circumstances rather than relying solely on excerpts reproduced by entertainment outlets. Bacci’s explanation, including his insistence that the performance itself justified his remarks, is relevant to that evaluation, as is Anitta’s decision to seek the removal of the publications and financial compensation. At present, the two sides have presented conflicting positions about the significance and acceptability of the comments.
Leave a Reply