Scam Ads and Meta's Responsibility

US senators, R-Josh Hawley, and D-Richard Blumenthal, want the Federal Trade Commission and the Securities and Exchange Commission to investigate revenue from user ads on Facebook and Instagram, that they claim, promote scams. They state that should investigations find such accusations to be accurate, Meta should have to give up associated profits, pay penalties, and agree to cease running such advertisements.

Meta claims it has already reduced user reports of scams by 58% over the last 18 months. Note the wording – “user reports” vs actual incidents. Intentional wording... or simply an honest misspeak? Meta states, “We aggressively fight fraud and scams because people on our platforms don’t want this content, legitimate advertisers don’t want it and we don’t want it either.” Personally, I want absolutely zero ads, but as long as Facebook is free… let’s just say, ad abundance has made me brain-dead to them.

Hawley and Blumenthal express doubt over Meta’s efforts to combat illicit advertising. “Even a short review of Meta’s Ad Library…. shows clearly identifiable advertisements for illicit gambling, payment scams, crypto scams, AI deepfake sex services, and fake offers of federal benefits.” They added, “Scams have been allowed to take over Facebook and Instagram as Meta has drastically cut its safety staff, including for FTC mandated reviews, even as it dumps unimaginable sums into its generative AI projects.“

Reportedly, Meta (owner of Facebook and Instagram) earns $7bn in revenue from scam ads every year – or about 3.6% of their revenues – hardly a takeover. Meta’s anti-fraud rules arguably didn’t apply to some ads that regulators, and some of their own staff, ‘thought’ contradicted its advertising rules.

It is estimated that Americans lost $158bn due to scams last year. Knowing that, I have two simple questions. 1) How much of that amount was lost by people with dementia or other mental illnesses vs those who are just too stupid/trusting to see a blatantly obvious scam?… and, 2) Should we really expect Meta to be able to diagnose every scam ad as a scam?

Addressing the latter, I believe it impossible for a company (even as large as Meta) to analyze EVERY person wanting to run ads on their platforms. Almost 18 million ads appear in their Library. If scam ad rates match revenue rates, that’s over 600,000 scam ads. Algorithms won’t catch everything, and neither will humans, assuming one could even hire enough people. Could they do better? Maybe!

As for the first question, it’s impossible to fix stupid, albeit a disease or just plain ignorance. If you have a relative with dementia or other mental illness, their online activity should be monitored in the same way every parent should consistently monitor their child’s online activity. The digital world is just as dangerous as the real world.

Then there’s just the everyday stupid who couldn’t find their way to Oz even with the Yellow Brick Road to guide them. For them, no legislation or crackdown on the nefarious will cure their idiocy. Freedom, even online, requires self-responsibility, which is far more protectionist than any government action.

Source used : The Guardian Photograph: Anadolu/Getty Images