Fake Celebrity Ads: What Meta Earns and Who Pays Meta -…

In August 2026, Rafał Brzoska, the billionaire founder of InPost, became the target of a sophisticated deepfake campaign. Using AI models trained on his public appearances, scammers created convincing video advertisements that featured a digitally synthesized version of Brzoska promoting fraudulent investment platforms. These ads reached millions of users across Facebook and Instagram, leading to thousands of individuals suffering financial losses. Lawyers for Brzoska and his wife, Omenaa Mensah, identified over 260 distinct variants of these deceptive materials, which were part of a broader trend involving the unauthorized use of at least 121 Polish public figures in 2024 alone.

What happened

The attack utilized a complex, cross-border supply chain designed to evade detection and maximize reach. The process began with the creation of high-quality deepfake video content and cloned news sites featuring fabricated interviews. These ads were then served through Meta’s advertising ecosystem, which, according to internal documents leaked between 2021 and 2025, prioritized revenue over fraud prevention.

Meta’s internal systems reportedly utilized a revenue guardrail that limited enforcement costs to 0.15 percent of revenue, while simultaneously applying penalty bids that allowed suspected fraudulent advertisers to continue operating if they paid a premium. The company required 95 percent certainty that an account was fraudulent before suspension, and high-value accounts could accumulate over 500 violations without being removed.

Behind the scenes, the operation relied on a fragmented network of organizers, media buyers, and account brokers who provided access to hijacked business accounts. Once a user engaged with the ad, they were funneled to call centers—often identified as organized-crime operations—where victims were pressured to invest. The scam was reinforced by the psychological impact of celebrity authority and high processing fluency, making the fraudulent content appear legitimate to potential victims. While Meta has defended its actions by citing the removal of millions of scam ads, internal analyses and subsequent legal scrutiny have highlighted the platform's role as a distribution layer for these global fraud networks.