There's a lot more to this investigation than the headline suggests. Reuters has internal documents that show Meta is more concerned with losing ad revenue than combating scams and concluded that regulatory fines would likely be less than their revenue from scams.
that's really the problem. regulatory rules are so impotent violating them is nothing more than an operating expense for large corporations.
We need forfeiture of all revenue earned by violating activities, and C-suite criminal liability. Not that we'd ever get such measures, but it is what it would take, as documented in other countries that have successfully combatted corporate intentional misconduct like this.
Meta projected 10% of its 2024 revenue would come from ads for scams and banned goods, documents seen by Reuters show. And the social media giant internally estimates that its platforms show users 15 billion scam ads a day. Among its responses to suspected rogue marketers: charging them a premium for ads – and issuing reports on ’Scammiest Scammers.’
> "If the company is less certain – but still believes the advertiser is a likely scammer – Meta charges higher ad rates as a penalty, according to the documents"
In other words: More "uncatchable" scammers == higher scam rate == more $$$$ for Meta
I'd assume whoever came up with this scheme was rewarded handsomely by Facebook
