Meta bị cáo buộc cố ý quảng cáo lừa đảo "kiếm 7 tỷ mỗi năm"! Đại diện Facebook còn tránh trả lời câu hỏi của phóng viên?

California, Santa Clara County, USA, has sued Meta, accusing its subsidiaries Facebook and Instagram of long-term tolerance of false scam advertisements and profiting heavily from them, allegedly violating unfair business practices laws.

According to Reuters, Santa Clara County has filed a lawsuit against Meta Platforms in court, alleging that its Facebook and Instagram have long tolerated scam ads and profited from them, in violation of California laws related to false advertising and unfair business practices.

The lawsuit was filed on Monday in the Superior Court of Santa Clara County, representing all residents of California. Santa Clara County is demanding that the court order Meta to return ill-gotten gains, pay civil damages, and cease engaging in unfair business practices.

Meta denies intentionally accepting scam ads to increase revenue and stated it will defend against the lawsuit.

Santa Clara County alleges: Meta earns 7 billion USD annually from scam ads

The complaint cites internal Meta documents disclosed by Reuters last year, indicating that Meta could earn up to 7 billion USD annually from so-called "high-risk" scam ads. These ads often show obvious signs of fraud but are still able to be placed on Facebook and Instagram.

Santa Clara County accuses Meta of not fully cracking down on scam advertisers, but instead setting internal regulations that, when anti-fraud measures might significantly impact revenue, limit or relax review processes. In other words, the lawsuit claims that Meta is not simply unable to remove scam ads due to technical difficulties, but is choosing to tolerate their presence to some extent for commercial gain.

Meta's rebuttal: Reuters report distorts motives, ignores company's anti-scam efforts

Meta spokesperson Andy Stone responded that the lawsuit relies on Reuters' reporting, but that the report "distorts Meta's motives" and overlooks the comprehensive measures the company takes daily to combat scams.

He stated that Meta actively fights scam activities both inside and outside the platform because scams are detrimental to the company as well as to users and businesses relying on Meta services.

Meta's position is that the platform has not deliberately accepted scam ads to increase revenue, and that the company has long invested in security systems, review mechanisms, and anti-scam measures. However, the Santa Clara County lawsuit focuses on whether Meta was aware that some ads were highly suspicious but still allowed them to be continuously run.

Further allegations in the complaint: Meta allows scam ads to target users who have clicked on similar scam content

Santa Clara County provided more details in the lawsuit, accusing Meta of playing a "substantial facilitating" role in the scam ad ecosystem.

The complaint states that Meta permits middlemen to sell accounts used for ad placement, some of which even receive protections that make enforcement more difficult. It also accuses Meta of targeting users who have previously clicked on fake products or services, making vulnerable groups more likely to be targeted again.

Additionally, Santa Clara County cites Reuters' testing results, claiming that Meta's generative AI system sometimes assists unethical marketers in creating scam ads. This extends the case beyond traditional ad review issues to include whether AI tools might be used to amplify scam content, raising regulatory concerns.

Tony LoPresti, legal counsel for Santa Clara County, said Meta's behavior has reached an "extraordinary" scale that must be stopped. He emphasized that as a civil prosecutor in Silicon Valley, Santa Clara County has a special responsibility to hold tech companies accountable under the law.

The complaint states that Meta has long promised that anti-scam efforts are a top priority for the platform and claims the company rigorously reviews ads that violate platform policies. However, Santa Clara County believes these statements mislead the public and conceal the fact that scam ads actually generate huge profits for Meta.

More explosively, the county claims that based on their information, Meta may even adjust the number of scam ads allowed on the platform to smooth profits or meet specific revenue targets.

If these allegations are proven in court, Meta could face not only issues with content moderation failure but also more serious risks related to business models and investor disclosures.

Taiwanese creator: Witnessed Facebook representatives leave before press questions

This California lawsuit has also sparked discussion in Taiwan. Influencer "Men’s Game 玩物誌" posted on social media that they were invited in 2025 to participate in a Taiwan Digital Development Ministry anti-scam awareness campaign and attended a press conference. At that time, the Ministry invited representatives from Facebook, YouTube, and LINE to explain anti-scam mechanisms.

He said that YouTube and LINE representatives explained anti-scam measures on-site and answered questions from reporters, but when it was Facebook's turn, the representative had already left the scene. He described the situation as "slipping away," and noted that both reporters and attendees were quite stunned.

The creator also criticized that reporting scam content on Facebook has limited effectiveness, and suggested that when encountering scams, users should report directly through the Digital Development Ministry's dedicated reporting lines or systems. He believes that from the Cambridge Analytica data scandal, to the anti-scam press conference experience, and now to the 2026 California lawsuit, Facebook's attitude towards platform responsibility has not fundamentally changed.

• Article reprinted with permission from: 《鏈新聞》
• Original title: 《Meta 遭控刻意推送詐騙廣告賺取 70 億年收，網紅曝 Facebook 代表躲避記者提問》
• Original author: Neo