Fraudster paid 7 cents per view for deepfake video on Facebook

The video is crafted to mimic an A Current Affair interview and showcases modified versions of the treasurer and wealthy individuals

A scammer spent $7,000 to reach a potential audience of 100,000 Australians through a deepfake A Current Affair video on Facebook. The video featured manipulated versions of Jim Chalmers, Dick Smith, Andrew Forrest, and Gina Rinehart, and was designed to mimic an A Current Affair segment. The fabricated content, presented as an interview with host Ally Langdon, raised concerns prompting a public warning from Dick Smith.

This marks the most recent manifestation of celebrity scam investment advertisements that have afflicted social media platforms and Google’s AdWords for an extended period. In the prior version, images were associated with counterfeit news pages, while the current ads employ deepfake videos that not only correspond to the appearance of the individuals being impersonated but also replicate their voices.

Within the video, the imposter posing as Chalmers asserts that the government has presented a report in parliament endorsing a supposedly successful investment, which is, in reality, a fraudulent scheme. The misleading content asserts government guarantees and treasury recommendations, urging individuals to initiate with $349 and promising weekly withdrawals of $7,200.

Smith conveyed on his website, “It is completely fraudulent. The scammers have fabricated the voice and synchronized it with lip movements to give it an appearance of authenticity. Do not open it, and do not send any money. It is a scam.”

As per the data from Facebook’s ad library, the scammers spent between CAD$6,000 and $7,000 (equivalent to A$7,700) in Canadian dollars. This expenditure covered 26 ads circulated from November 23 to 28, aiming to achieve up to 100,000 impressions on Facebook. The cost roughly translates to about 7 cents per view.

The data indicates that the advertisement was more frequently viewed by men than women, and individuals over 45 were more likely to see it compared to those aged 35 to 44.

It is uncommon for scam ads of this nature to be featured in Facebook’s ad library, a platform the company maintains for transparency. Typically, ads are included in the transparency library only if they pertain to a political issue. Not every ad that Facebook accepts money for is included, and scam ads are not usually part of this catalog.

The inclusion of the treasurer in the ad may have automatically prompted Facebook to categorize it as political. Meta flagged several ads as running “without a required disclaimer,” a characteristic often linked to political advertisements.

Following contact from Guardian Australia regarding the ads, Meta removed the account responsible for promoting them.

Meta declined to provide details about the overall revenue generated from scam ads. However, a spokesperson mentioned that the company is consistently combating scams using a blend of technology, including advanced machine learning techniques and specialized reviewers, to detect content and accounts violating their policies.

The spokesperson added, “We are presently collaborating across industries and with the government to explore new methods to thwart scammers.

The Meta spokesperson emphasized the importance of reporting scams when identified and advised victims to contact law enforcement. According to data from the Australian Competition and Consumer Commission’s Scamwatch, Australians have reported losses of $53.3 million to investment scams on social media this year, with over 1,200 reports until the end of October.

An ACCC spokesperson mentioned that the government’s national anti-scam center notifies Meta to remove scams upon awareness. The spokesperson emphasized the expectation for digital platforms to prevent the display of scam ads to consumers and ensure swift removal through internal reporting pathways.

Meta is currently facing two lawsuits related to the celebrity investment scam ads—a criminal case filed by Forrest in Western Australia and a civil case brought by the ACCC.

In October, the federal court dismissed Meta’s endeavor to postpone the ACCC case until the completion of the Forrest criminal case in Western Australia. Meta contended that the civil case might bias the criminal case. However, in recently published findings, Federal Court Justice Elizabeth Cheeseman deemed the motion premature and indicated that potential concerns could be effectively addressed.