Tag Archives: Brian Stelter

Why Is Meta Letting Chinese Ad Scammers Rip Off Its Users For $3 Billion/Year?

by doctorads

Well the Doc opened up the old mailbag today and here’s what poured out.

Dear Dr. Ads,

There I was, minding my own business and checking out Brian Stelter’s Reliable Sources newsletter, when I came across this item about the latest tech world ad scam.

‘Meta tolerates rampant ad fraud from China…’
“…to safeguard billions in revenue.” That’s the headline on a new Reuters investigation by Jeff Horwitz and Engen Tham that relies heavily on internal documents. The reporters found that Meta “decided to accept high levels of fraudulent advertisements from China” as the company “wanted to minimize ‘revenue impact’ caused by cracking down on the scams.”

WhatsApp with that, Doc? Strip-mining our data isn’t enough for Mark Suckaberg? Now he’s running Fleecebook and Instascam for Chinese fraudsters?

– Met-ad-verse

Dear M-a-v,

Let’s start with some backstory.

Last week we noted that Meta was one of the tech companies (along with Cash App, Coinbase, Match Group, and Ripple) involved in the Tech Against Scams Coalition, which had just launched a Potemkin marketing campaign purportedly to help consumers identify and avoid online fraudsters. It lasted about as long as a standard WhatsApp message, and had slightly less impact.

We also linked to Jeff Horwitz’s November Reuters piece reporting that “Meta internally projected late last year that it would earn about 10% of its overall annual revenue – or $16 billion – from running advertising for scams and banned goods, internal company documents show.”

Now comes this Reuters follow-up piece that zeroes in on the China connection to Meta’s ad-scam haul. In that case, fraudulent advertising generated not 10%, but 19% of the company’s revenues, or $3 billion of its $18 billion Chinese take in 2024.

Meta’s own internal audits showed that “Meta believed China was the country of origin of roughly a quarter of all ads for scams and banned products on Meta’s platforms worldwide.”  The company set up an anti-fraud team that “slashed the problematic ads by about half during the second half of 2024 – from 19% to 9% of the total advertising revenue coming from China.”

Then Meta Chief Executive Mark Zuckerberg weighed in.

“As a result of Integrity Strategy pivot and follow-up from Zuck,” a late 2024 document notes, the China ads-enforcement team was “asked to pause” its work. Reuters was unable to learn the specifics of the CEO’s involvement or what the so-called “Integrity Strategy pivot” entailed.

But after Zuckerberg’s input, the documents show, Meta disbanded its China-focused anti-scam team. It also lifted a freeze it had introduced on granting new Chinese ad agencies access to its platforms. One document shows that Meta shelved yet other anti-scam measures that internal tests had indicated would be effective.

So, to recap . . .

1) Meta knows.

2) Meta don’t care.

The Doc’s diagnosis: Mark Suckaberg never met a corner he wasn’t happy to cut. Why would he change now?

Can RFK Jr. Really Make Pharmaceutical Commercials Too Costly to Run?

by doctorads

Well the Doc opened up the old mailbag today and here’s what poured out.

Dear Dr. Ads,

There I was, minding my own business and reading Brian Stelter’s Reliable Sources newsletter, when I came across this item about the latest incarnation of Health and Human Services head Robert F. Kennedy Jr.’s jihad against Big Pharma.

Robert F. Kennedy Jr.‘s HHS is weighing a pair of policies cracking down on direct-to-consumer drug ads by making them more costly to produce. The rules could potentially “leave broadcasters in financial straits,” as they would choke off a crucial revenue source, CNN’s Liam Reilly and Tami Luhby report. Full story here…

What the hey, Doc – will RFK Jr. stop at nothing to land his white whale?

– Bitter Pill

Dear BP,

As you might have noticed, the Doc has been on Bobby Brainworm (pat. pending) like Brown on Williamson for months now over his Just Say No to Drug Ads campaign. Here’s the latest brainstorm from RFK Irregular, as detailed by CNN’s Liam Reilly and Tami Luhby.

While not an outright ban, the two policies would make it significantly more difficult and expensive for drug companies to push their products across broadcasters’ airwaves, according to a Bloomberg report on Tuesday. The policies look to either mandate that advertisers elaborate on the risks posed by their drugs — forcing ads to be longer and, therefore, more expensive — or bar drugmakers from writing off direct-to-consumer ads as business expenses on their taxes, also padding the bill, Bloomberg reported.

We’re talking real money here, folks: “Companies spent $10.8 billion in 2024 on direct-to-consumer pharmaceutical advertising in total, according to a report from the advertising data firm MediaRadar,” says Rachel Cohrs Zhang in her Bloomberg piece.

A whopping 59% of that money goes to TV spots. Case in point: “AbbVie alone spent $2 billion on direct-to-consumer drug ads last year, primarily on advertising for the company’s anti-inflammatory drugs Skyrizi and Rinvoq.”

Representative sample . . .

Annoying? Perhaps. Lucrative? Definitely. “The medicines brought in more than $5 billion for AbbVie in the first quarter of 2025.” That’s $5 billion in three months (annualized return on investment: 1000%) for those of you keeping score at home.

Meanwhile, “Senators Bernie Sanders and Angus King [have] introduced a bill to ban all prescription drug advertising,” according to Chris Williams at Fox News, thereby taking on both the pharmaceutical and broadcast industries.

Wake me when people start saying, “Doctor, I don’t see spots before my eyes.”

Could Florida TV Execs Go to Jail for Running an Abortion-Rights Ad?

by doctorads

Well the Doc opened up the old mailbag today and here’s what poured out.

Dear Dr. Ads,

There I was, minding my own business and reading Brian Stelter’s CNN Reliable Sources newsletter, when I came across this item about the Florida Health Department’s cease-and-desist letters sent last week to WCJB in Gainesville and WFLA in Tampa.

The threat from the health department underscores the intensity of the political battle over Amendment 4, a ballot measure that would enshrine abortion rights in Florida’s constitution. The state government led by [Gov. Ron] DeSantis has campaigned aggressively against the amendment, including by running its own TV ads.

The cease-and-desist letters from John Wilson, general counsel for the state health department, appear to be part of that campaign. The letters were first reported by Orlando investigative journalist Jason Garcia and state news outlet Florida Politics.

In the letters, Wilson targeted an ad produced by the group Floridians Protecting Freedom, which is behind the “Yes on 4 Campaign” in favor of abortion rights.

What the hell, Doc – hasn’t Pudding Fingers Ron DeSantis heard of the First Amendment?

– Pudding People First

Dear PPF,

Clearly, pudding’s not the only thing Florida Gov. Ron DeSantis (R-Can’t Wait for ’28) wants his fingers in.

As MSNBC’s Ja’han Jones reports, trying to bully local television stations is just the latest DeSantis attack on the abortion rights ballot measure.

The DeSantis administration recently had its election police unit investigate people who had signed a petition to get Amendment 4 on the ballot. Then the administration used taxpayer money to launch an anti-abortion website. The administration also used state money to air Orwellian television ads proclaiming that “Florida cares about women and families.”

Floridians Protecting Freedom has responded with this ad, which “depicts a woman named Caroline who became pregnant with her second child after a brain cancer diagnosis.”

This is nuts graf: “The doctors knew that if I did not end my pregnancy, I would lose my baby, I would lose my life, and my daughter would lose her mom. Florida has now banned abortions, even in cases like mine.”

The CNN piece features this response from Florida officials.

Wilson’s letter says it is “categorically false” to claim that “current Florida law does not allow physicians to perform abortions necessary to preserve the lives and health of pregnant women.” Thus, he wrote, airing the ad is “dangerous” to the public’s health, and the health department could use its legal powers to initiate criminal proceedings.

The Doc’s diagnosis: The Florida Health Department’s approach to the First Amendment is roughly similar to Meatball Ron’s attitude toward silverware – useful at times, but not essential.

Chew on that for awhile.