The Dark Side of Social Media’s Most Lucrative Ad Deal

Temu spent up to $962 million on ads that helped finance an army of fake creators on Meta platforms, according to research from Online Risk Labs. This is not just a case of a company getting duped by scammers; it’s a stark illustration of the darker side of social media’s most lucrative ad deal.

At the heart of this issue lies Ya Lily, or rather, what appears to be Ya Lily – a top creator for Temu’s partnership ads on Meta platforms in the UK and Europe. But scratch beneath the surface, and you’ll find that Ya Lily is likely a fake account, one of 73 out of the top 100 creators boosted by Temu’s partnership ads who are probably not real.

The implications are significant. Temu’s use of fake accounts to drive ad revenue raises serious questions about the company’s accountability and compliance with European laws. The Digital Services Act requires large platform providers like Meta to publish a public library of all their ads, allowing researchers to identify trends or problematic commercial behavior.

In practice, this means that companies like Temu must be transparent about their advertising practices and ensure that their ads comply with regulations. However, the ease with which fake accounts can be created and used to drive ad revenue suggests that this is not always the case.

The partnership ad model has proven incredibly lucrative for Meta. In Q1 2026, the company booked $10 billion in revenues from partnership ads alone – about 17% of its entire revenue. Within this segment, Temu’s presence is enormous, with 31 official pages on Meta running over 9 million ads across both platforms between January 2025 and April 2026.

This raises concerns about accountability and compliance with European laws. The Digital Markets, Competition & Consumers Act of 2024 bans advertising that is misleading in the UK, while the new EU AI Act requires publishers of AI-generated content to label it transparently.

Stuart Lester, a partner at law firm Mishcon de Reya’s advertising and marketing group in London, warns that creating fake accounts to carry advertising can be a breach of regulations in multiple European jurisdictions. “That will be misleading,” he says. “I would say, certainly, in the UK and I strongly suspect in the EU as well.”

The partnership between Temu and Meta raises significant questions about accountability and compliance with European laws. While Meta has not commented on the issue, it’s clear that the company bears some responsibility for policing its platforms.

Among the top 100 influencers collaborating with Temu, there are certainly some real people among them. However, in ORL’s manager Vendula Prokůpková’s estimate, they account for no more than 15–20%. By contrast, she has serious doubts about the authenticity of accounts that, according to the platform, are based in Russia, China, or Iran.

The fallout from this scandal is far from over. As regulators and lawmakers begin to scrutinize Meta’s partnership ad model, it’s clear that Temu – and other companies like it – must be held accountable for their actions.

Ultimately, the real question is not what this means for Temu or Meta; it’s what this says about our collective willingness to engage with social media platforms that are fundamentally flawed. The ease with which fake accounts can be created and used to drive ad revenue raises serious questions about the very fabric of online discourse.