Meta Platforms, owner of Facebook, Instagram, and WhatsApp, faces a growing controversy as it generates $16 billion annually from fake and fraudulent ads, highlighting concerns over user safety and corporate ethics.
 |
| Meta earns billions from fraudulent ads, drawing attention to its ad policies and raising concerns about its responsibility to protect users from scams. Image: CH |
Tech Desk — November 13, 2025:
Meta Platforms, the tech giant behind Facebook, Instagram, and WhatsApp, is facing growing scrutiny over the significant portion of its revenue generated from fake and fraudulent advertisements. A new report from Reuters reveals that Meta makes about 10 percent of its total annual revenue—an estimated $16 billion in 2024—from ads promoting illegal activities, including gambling, fake investments, and counterfeit drugs. These ads, often targeting vulnerable users, typically involve products or services that don’t exist in reality, raising serious concerns about the company’s commitment to user safety and the ethical implications of its business practices.
The scale of the issue is staggering: with Meta's ad business driving this massive income, questions are now being raised about whether the company is prioritizing profits over the well-being of its users. Despite having an automated ad detection system, Meta only shuts down fraudulent ads when there is a 95 percent certainty they are deceptive. This delayed approach has drawn criticism from experts, who argue that Meta's policy of allowing fake ads to run until nearly certain of their fraudulent nature is a failure of corporate responsibility.
In an effort to defend its actions, Meta spokesperson Andy Stone insisted that the company has made significant strides in curbing deceptive ads, pointing to a 58 percent reduction in user complaints over the last 18 months. Meta also claims to have removed over 134 million fake ads during the same period. However, this may not be enough to quell public concern or to address the long-term trust issues that could arise if Meta fails to implement a more proactive approach.
While Meta’s efforts to remove fraudulent ads are commendable, the company’s reliance on its automated system to detect fraud raises further questions about its business practices. The fact that Meta allows such ads to remain active until they can be conclusively flagged as fraudulent suggests that the company may have been willing to tolerate deception to protect its revenue stream.
This is particularly problematic as the ad content in question often promotes scams targeting vulnerable individuals—whether it's illegal gambling schemes, fraudulent investment opportunities, or illicit drug sales. For Meta, a delay in removing these ads could mean additional revenue, but for users, it translates into real-world consequences, including financial loss and the erosion of trust in the platform.
If Meta continues to focus on maximizing ad revenue at the expense of user safety, the company risks long-term damage to its reputation. Trust is the cornerstone of Meta’s massive user base, and the more users perceive Meta as a platform that tolerates scams and fraud, the more likely they are to abandon the platform or demand stricter regulations.
In an era where consumer trust is increasingly hard to maintain, Meta’s failure to enforce more rigorous ad verification could lead to greater regulatory scrutiny and possibly even legal repercussions. Already, governments around the world are turning their attention to digital advertising, and Meta may soon find itself facing a global push for reform in how ads are managed on its platforms.
In the face of mounting concerns, Meta has a clear choice to make: continue prioritizing revenue at the risk of user trust, or take more decisive action to protect its users and improve its advertising practices. The company could implement stricter ad verification systems, invest in human oversight, and increase transparency in its ad policies. Ultimately, how Meta responds to these challenges will shape its future in the digital advertising space and determine whether it can maintain its leadership position in social media or face a decline in brand value.
Meta’s $16 billion revenue from fake ads may be a financial windfall in the short term, but at what cost to the company’s reputation and user trust? The next few months could be crucial in determining whether Meta can navigate these ethical concerns or whether its current practices will result in a long-term loss of consumer confidence.