Banned But Still Paid: Facebook’s Disinformation Monetization Dilemma
Poinews.com – Facebook continues to face scrutiny as disinformation accounts remain profitable despite being flagged for spreading false content. A recent study underscores the challenge of keeping these accounts from monetizing their harmful influence, with the focus keyword “banned but still paid” echoing through its findings. Conducted by What to Fix, a tech policy non-profit, and Raskrinkavanje, a Bosnian fact-checking group, the research analyzed over 290 Facebook pages in Bosnia that had been reported for distributing fake information at least ten times by Meta’s fact-checking partners. The results reveal a troubling trend: many of these accounts not only persist but also continue to generate revenue, raising questions about the effectiveness of Meta’s policies.
Meta’s Monetization Policies and Fact-Check Collaboration
Meta has implemented a range of tools to combat misinformation, including partnerships with third-party fact-checkers. However, the study found that 51 of the 290 analyzed accounts had previously enrolled in at least one monetization program. One-third of these were eligible for multiple revenue streams before 2024, when the company streamlined its monetization methods into an invite-only system. Nine additional accounts were directly invited by Meta to join this program, which rewards creators based on post engagement and content performance. Despite these measures, the report highlights a gap between policy enforcement and actual outcomes, with the phrase “banned but still paid” capturing the essence of this issue.
“Our findings raise important questions about Meta’s ability to fulfill its commitment to demonetise repeat disinformation offenders,” the study noted, emphasizing the platform’s struggle to balance revenue generation with content integrity.
The research further reveals that 84% of accounts restricted for repeated policy violations were able to re-enter monetization programs. Over 50% of these accounts were reinstated within a month, with some suspensions lasting only two days. This rapid reinstatement suggests that Meta’s system may allow disinformation creators to bypass restrictions and continue earning income, even after being identified as repeat offenders. The phrase “banned but still paid” thus becomes a stark reality, as these accounts exploit loopholes to sustain their financial viability.
Case Study: Bosnia’s Disinformation Landscape
The study’s focus on Bosnia provides a regional example of how disinformation accounts operate. By examining content labeled as “fake” by fact-checkers, the researchers found that these pages often use tactics such as clickbait headlines and conspiracy theories to engage audiences. Meta defines “fake” content as anything without factual basis, including false quotes, impossible claims, and real media misused to misrepresent unrelated events. Despite these clear definitions, the study shows that many accounts remain active in monetization programs, challenging the platform’s ability to enforce its own standards.
Additionally, the report points to Meta’s reliance on fact-checking organizations for identifying problematic content. These groups, such as Raskrinkavanje, submit reports to Meta, which then decides whether to demonetize accounts. However, the lack of detailed records from Meta complicates this process, forcing fact-checkers to rely on ongoing disclosures and internal archives. The study argues that this fragmented system creates opportunities for disinformation accounts to continue generating income, even after being flagged for violations. The phrase “banned but still paid” encapsulates the persistence of these accounts in a monetization ecosystem that prioritizes engagement over accuracy.
Meta’s current approach to content monetization also involves a tiered system where accounts must meet certain criteria to qualify for revenue. The study highlights that some banned accounts meet these thresholds by leveraging short-term suspensions or strategic content adjustments. For instance, pages that post misinformation in the morning might be flagged by fact-checkers, only to be reinstated by afternoon, allowing them to continue earning income. This cyclical pattern underscores the need for more robust monitoring and enforcement mechanisms to address the issue of “banned but still paid” accounts effectively.
Euronews Next sought comment from Meta but received no response at the time of publication. What to Fix noted that the study’s findings are consistent with broader trends across Facebook’s platform, where disinformation accounts often operate in regions with less stringent enforcement. The report calls on the European Union to investigate whether Meta complies with the Digital Services Act (DSA), which requires platforms to demonetize disinformation content. If Facebook continues to allow “banned but still paid” accounts to thrive, it may risk failing to meet its obligations under the Code of Conduct on Disinformation.
