An online advertisement aimed at Donald Trump supporters promised enticing rewards: a free Trump 2024 flag and a commemorative coin in exchange for taking a short survey and covering a $5 shipping fee with a credit card. The ad, found on platforms like Facebook and YouTube, assured, “You’ll get two free gifts just by taking this quick poll in support of Trump.”
However, the ad failed to mention the $80 charge that later appeared on participants’ credit card statements, revealing the scam.
Political advertisements on social media are a highly effective tool for candidates to connect with supporters and raise campaign funds. Yet, as a new report from Syracuse University highlights, the lack of stringent regulations and inconsistent enforcement by tech companies make these ads ripe for spreading misinformation and an easy target for con artists.
“There is very little regulation on the platforms,” said Jennifer Stromer-Galley, the professor who led the research for the ElectionGraph Project at Syracuse University’s Institute for Democracy, Journalism & Citizenship. “It leaves the American public vulnerable to misinformation, disinformation, and propaganda.”
Stromer-Galley’s research analyzed over 2,200 groups on Facebook and Instagram running ads mentioning presidential candidates between September and May. These ads cost nearly $19 million and garnered over 1 billion views. Data from Meta, Facebook’s parent company, revealed that both right- and left-leaning ads targeted older voters more than younger ones. Right-leaning ads predominantly aimed at men, while progressive ads focused more on women.
Overall, conservative groups purchased more ads than progressive ones. Immigration was the top issue in right-leaning ads, whereas the economy dominated progressive ads. Many ads contained misleading information, including deepfake videos and audio of celebrities allegedly crying during a speech by former First Lady Melania Trump. False claims about urban crime and immigration were particularly frequent.
While many ad groups were legitimate, some seemed more focused on acquiring users’ financial data than promoting any candidate. Using data from Neo4j, Stromer-Galley discovered that some pages shared common creators or ran nearly identical ads. When one page was removed, another quickly appeared.
These pages often sold Trump-related merchandise such as flags, hats, and banners, or advertised fake investment schemes, aiming to collect credit card information. The ads promising a free Trump flag were linked to a group called Liberty Defender Group. Attempts to contact the group were unsuccessful, and their website has since shifted focus to selling energy efficiency devices.
Meta removed most of the network’s ads and pages earlier this year after researchers flagged their activity, though the ads persist on other platforms. Meta states it prohibits scams or content that could interfere with elections and removes ads violating these rules. The company advises users to avoid clicking on suspicious links or sharing personal information with untrustworthy sources.
The Trump campaign, with no known ties to the network, did not respond to a request for comment.
Researchers could only study ads on Meta platforms because other companies do not make such information public. Consequently, Stromer-Galley noted, the public remains largely unaware of the full extent of misinformation and scams proliferating on social media.
