Meta, the parent company of Facebook, is facing scrutiny for its monetisation practices, which involve paying controversial creators to produce content that often breaches the platform's policies. This includes far-right agitators, neo-Nazis, and individuals promoting racist and anti-immigrant ideologies. The investigation by ABC NEWS Verify reveals a disturbing trend where Meta's financial incentives align with the production of controversial and potentially hateful content.
Hugo Lennon, a white nationalist who shouted racist abuse at the Indian Prime Minister, has been receiving revenue through Facebook's Content Monetization program since September 2025. Lennon's content includes racist outbursts and references to white supremacist concepts. Similarly, The Noticer, a far-right news website promoting neo-Nazi ideologies, has been monetizing content through the same program since November 2025, with a brief suspension from January 11 to February 15. These examples highlight the platform's willingness to engage with and profit from controversial creators.
The issue extends beyond individual creators. Monica Smit, the founder of an anti-vaccine group, has been earning advertising revenue from Facebook since 2017, despite promoting vaccine misinformation. This raises concerns about the platform's ability to moderate and control the spread of harmful content. Meta's invitation-only monetisation program, which allows creators to earn money from their posts, has been criticised for its lack of transparency and potential liability for the content produced by its partners.
What To Fix, a tech policy non-profit, emphasises the moral and ethical implications of Meta's actions. The organisation's executive director, Victoire Rio, argues that Meta's direct commercial relationship with these controversial creators makes them complicit in the spread of harmful content. The company's policies, which distinguish between offensive speech and content that could lead to offline violence, are questioned, as the investigated pages often appear to violate these standards.
The financial incentives provided by Meta's monetisation programs are seen as a deliberate strategy to encourage engagement, even if it means promoting controversial and extreme content. Dr. Kaz Ross, an independent right-wing extremism researcher, highlights the platform's financial model, which rewards creators for engagement, often achieved through rage bait and extremist material. This raises concerns about the platform's responsibility in shaping public discourse and the potential for further radicalisation.
In conclusion, Meta's monetisation practices, as exposed by the ABC NEWS Verify investigation, have raised significant ethical and policy concerns. The company's willingness to engage with and profit from controversial creators, despite clear policy violations, highlights the need for stricter transparency and accountability measures. As social media platforms continue to play a significant role in shaping public discourse, it is crucial to address the potential risks and implications of such monetisation practices.
