Meta’s anti-scam initiative ‘simply isn’t good enough’, Revolut says

Tech giant Meta needs to go further to protect its users from online scams, financial-technology company Revolut has said.  

Meta’s social media site Facebook and messaging platform WhatsApp represent the biggest sources of fraud reported to Revolut, according to figures published Thursday (3 October) by the online bank. 

Revolut argues Meta should monitor its own sites for potentially fraudulent content, and share in reimbursing the victims of ads from which it profited, in the EU as well as the UK.

“A commitment to data sharing, albeit needed, simply isn’t good enough,” Revolut’s Head of Financial Crime, Woody Malouf, said in a statement, adding: “Social media platforms not only continue to enable fraud … the issue is just as bad today as it was last year.”  

The broadside comes a day after Meta’s UK arm announced an information-sharing programme with banks including NatWest and Metro, which the tech firm said would enable action against thousands of accounts run by scammers.  

“We will only beat these criminals if we work together and share relevant information related to scams,” said Nathaniel Gleicher, Meta’s global head of counter-fraud in a Wednesday statement, adding that bank information helped it train systems to tackle illegal activity. 

Revolut’s figures, which cover most of the EU, UK, Norway and Switzerland, suggest purchase scams – ads for bogus websites which seek payment but never deliver goods – continue as the leading source of reported fraud.  

Job fraud – such as fake vacancy postings that seek upfront payments for training or administration costs – has also soared to reach 18% of all scams, Revolut said.  

In Brussels, MEPs have pushed for social media companies to take more responsibility for fraudulent ads – in particular where scammers request money while posing as a family member, bank or government agency.  

Those amendments to the EU’s payment services rules are now under consideration by member states.  

Meta did not immediately respond to a request for comment.