.svg)
Partner Simon Brown and Legal Director at Schillings Ireland, John Curtin, explore the reputational impact of fake ads and impersonation on social media - and what can be done to address them.
We are all familiar with celebrities or public-figures appearing in brand advertisements or endorsements on social media. But if you stop the scroll and look closely, sometimes, something may just feel a bit off. Perhaps the brand seems an unlikely fit, or the image overly polished. Increasingly, these subtle inconsistencies point to a larger problem: many of these ads are not real.
These fake ads and endorsements, many of them for sham investment schemes or shops that simply don’t exist, present obvious risks. Members of the public are at risk of being scammed, while those being impersonated face the prospect of growing reputational damage, as the scale and sophistication of these campaigns intensify.
"Even where content is taken down, brand or personal trust may already have been eroded, funds lost, and harmful associations established."
Without an effective and coordinated response, the harm can snowball fast.
What are the common features of an impersonation campaign?
Most social media fake ads and false endorsement schemes follow a familiar pattern. They usually centre on a trusted organisation or individual- ranging from businesspeople, sports professionals or those with a strong public presence in society. Recent targets have included personal finance guru Martin Lewis, broadcasters Ben Fogle and Zoe Ball, and FT’s chief economics commentator, Martin Wolf.
The scam typically involves the entirely false suggestion that the individual or organisation endorses a product (often a cryptocurrency) and seeks investment. Once an individual or entity has been targeted, the material is then amplified through paid social advertising, cloned “news” articles, or fake accounts that closely mimic official profiles.
Increasingly, these campaigns are enhanced by AI, making them even more difficult to distinguish from legitimate ads. Voice cloning, synthetic video and realistic mock‑ups of reputable media outlets make deception harder to spot and easier to scale.
Although they can vary somewhat in delivery, the objective of the scam is often the same: to sell fraudulent investments, promote dubious products, harvest personal data, and/or divert payments to criminal networks.
"For the individuals and companies falsely associated with scams, the harm extends beyond the immediate financial loss or reputational damage. We also regularly see longer‑term risks of not taking action to tackle a false campaign, as misinformation can become embedded. "
There can also be political impact, as evident through the recent fake images and videos of Nigel Farage and Andrew Bailey circulating on social media.
Early detection and evidence capture
Early detection of a scam or impersonation campaign is critical to prevent it gaining significant traction online. This is particularly important given the increased use of paid advertising by fraudsters to amplify content and impersonation accounts, push scams, and cause real reputational harm.
For those individuals at heightened risk of being impersonated in such scams, either because of their position, public profile or prior use in similar campaigns, regular, ongoing monitoring is crucial.
This should include scanning platform ad libraries to identify whether the company's or individual's name, image or likeness is being used in paid advertising without consent.
"The difference in reputational impact, as well as reach, can be dramatic if the campaign is addressed when in it's infancy."
Alongside detection, full evidence gathering is key. Maintaining an accurate record of the scams and infringing content ensures that any future complaints or enforcement is properly supported.
How to take action against fake ad campaigns
Fake ads, false endorsement and impersonation are8 reputational attacks that demand a coordinated response - both to address the scam itself, and to rebuild any resulting reputational damage.
Once a campaign has been identified, the response should be tailored to the specific facts, but in most cases, it will involve:
1. Platform engagement
Immediate engagement with the social media platform or host of the unlawful content should be the first step. Once on notice of unlawful content, platforms are required to act expeditiously to remove or disable access to it across the EU to avoid liability under Irish/EUlaw.* Engagement should also focus on putting safeguards in place to prevent the content from being re-uploaded.
2. Containment and suppression
Identify where the content has been replicated and republished, and taking legal steps to remove it and prevent further dissemination.
3. Strategic communications response
Legal takedown alone is rarely sufficient. A targeted communications strategy is needed to correct the record and prevent false narratives from gaining traction. Ensuring that key stakeholders are aware of the true position will help retain trust.
4. Control and preparedness
Taking control of your digital footprint and assets – including key social media handles - alongside maintaining trademark and brand ownership records, allows swift and direct responses to any scam campaign.
In a landscape where deception is becoming more scalable and more convincing, the ability to detect, respond and correct the record quickly is critical to maintaining trust.
* The most appropriate jurisdiction for any legal action by European based users against the platforms is likely to be in Ireland, given it is typically the Irish entities of the platforms which control user generated content across Europe. Schillings Ireland is well placed to engage directly to secure the quick takedown of this content and to push the platforms to put systems in place to ensure it is not reuploaded.
