“Facebook is the number 1 digital polluter”

L’atelier d’Émelie is a small jewelry business created by a young craftswoman and her grandmother, “a unique entrepreneurial adventure, focused on ecological and vegan craftsmanship”, we can read on the charming boutique’s website.

Customers come there after being lured by one of the dozens of ads that have been circulating on Facebook since January. But the “ethical” project will soon be put on hold, its instigators have announced with great sorrow.

“Currently, my grandmother is unable to continue running the business with me,” the younger half of the entrepreneurial duo announced in a sponsored Facebook post. “Without her, I prefer to pause the store for the time being.” Small consolation for customers: “exceptional discounts of up to 70% on a wide range of products.”

The catch? There is no Émelie, no sick grandmother, no “ethical, ecological and vegan” adventure. All the stock promoted by the company on the networks of Meta, the parent company of Facebook and Instagram, comes from Chinese suppliers and sells for a fraction of the price on sites like AliExpress, Shein or eBay.

Misleading or fraudulent ads on Meta are rife, often without their authors being worried. “Facebook is the number one digital polluter in terms of fraud in the developed world at the moment,” underlines Benoît Dupont, professor of criminology at the University of Montreal (UdeM).

“If we want to be concerned about crime, vehicle theft is important,” he said. “But in my opinion, it’s really online fraud that should interest federal politicians if they want to have an impact on the daily lives of their citizens.”

In the case of L’atelier d’Émelie, we reported the account about ten times in a month, just to test Meta’s algorithm. Result? Nothing. At the time of publication, some 150 paid publications were repeating the false story of the sick grandmother to a pool of tens of thousands of Quebec users.

At the top of the list

For request of The PressFraude-Alerte, an initiative associated with the UdeM School of Criminology, took a look at the 2,375 reports of fraud and misrepresentation listed on its site from October 22, 2022 to February 29, 2024.

Social networks were used as bait in about 20% of cases, all types of scams combined (romantic, commercial, etc.), according to data provided by expert Benoît Dupont. And what share of these social networks does Facebook represent? “From 80 to 85%.”

More than 70 Quebec customers have written on the Fraude-Alerte website that they have been scammed by L’atelier d’Émelie, notably because they have never received their order since January.

Others, who unpacked substandard products from China after several weeks, denounce an “immoral” practice.

Karine Otis is one of those who believed she had done business with a local and artisanal company, as advertised in the ads hosted by Meta. She spent about a hundred dollars on the store.

“With the tracking number, I realized that the order was coming from China,” she said.^me Otis immediately inquired with L’atelier d’Émelie, who cited logistical issues while reiterating their “commitment to quality and local excellence.”

The email messages received by the customer were generated by artificial intelligence, according to different detection tools used by The Press. “The quality of the French was impeccable,” emphasizes Mr.^me Otis, who denounces a “fraudulent” practice endorsed by the social network.

Meta does not grant interviews to Canadian media.

Lack of responsibility

In Canada, “there is no particular incentive for Meta, whether it’s Facebook or Instagram, to do more than the minimum necessary against fraud,” says Dupont of the University of Montreal. “The damage is only suffered by the victims. Facebook generates a lot of engagement and sells advertising through certain types of fraud. The platform produces a lot of digital pollution, and there is no way to hold it accountable.”

Canadian law tends to treat social media operators as hosts, which limits their liability for content shared on them to a minimum. A federal bill on online harms (C-63) aims to increase the liability of online platforms in terms of digital security, but fraud and false advertising are excluded from the initiative. It targets in particular content that incites violence, foments hatred or harms children. Social networks will also have to make inaccessible, within 24 hours, intimate images distributed non-consensually and child pornography.

Why was economic harm excluded from the bill? “Cyberfraud is already illegal in Canada under section 380 of the Criminal Code, whether committed online or in person,” Chantalle Aubertin, press secretary to Arif Virani, federal Minister of Justice, said in an email.

Taking action against the 2.0 giants would require “implementing regulations and penalties that would force them to review their entire business model,” says Professor Benoît Dupont.

In general, the European continent offers better protections against fraud and misrepresentation on social networks. In the United Kingdom, for example, operators must “put in place proportionate systems and processes to prevent the publication or hosting of fraudulent advertisements on their service and to remove them when they become aware of them,” according to recent provisions of the Online Safety Bill.

The British law also provides for a “super complaints” mechanism to deal with cases where a large group of consumers have been harmed, including on social networks.

That’s around 60% of all UK fraud cases originated from Meta platforms in 2023, according to financial firm Revolut.

In the United States, the Federal Trade Commission last year issued injunctions to Meta and seven other platforms to learn “how these companies review and limit paid commercial advertising that is misleading or exposes consumers to fraudulent health products, financial scams, counterfeit goods or other fraud.”

Toothless instances?

From a user’s point of view, “it’s disturbing how Meta doesn’t take into account its brand,” laments Vincent Gautrais, a full professor at the UdeM law faculty, who colorfully notes a “boring of social networks.”

For now, aggrieved citizens must rely on regulatory bodies such as the Competition Bureau in Canada, the Consumer Affairs Bureau or the Office de la protection du consommateur (OPC) in Quebec, “which have limited resources,” says Mr. Gautrais. While waiting for stricter legislation, “I think that institutional bodies should perhaps join forces and at least make statements of principle,” continues the specialist in information technology and e-commerce law.

The OPC says it has received nine complaints against Facebook Canada since 2018. To date, the organization has not taken any legal action against the company.

“A multinational like Meta, when it feels that there is not much movement at the state level to ensure control of online activities, what does it do?” asks Mr. Gautrais. “It does nothing. It continues. And it continues to make money.”

Meta’s market capitalization is now some $1.35 trillion. Despite its size and influence, the San Francisco-based company offers no direct access to customer service, either by email or phone, to free account holders.

“Meta’s response is that it has around 20,000 people who respond to reports,” notes Benoît Dupont, from the UdeM School of Criminology. “Yes, that’s the case, but there are only… 4 billion active users in the world.” The ratio is therefore approximately one referee for some 200,000 players, “a drop in the ocean.”

Read the column “Let yourself be moved, and lose your money”