Audience numbers and glowing reviews are the currency of influencer marketing, which is why regulators have started to treat faked versions of both as a legal problem. This explainer sets out what the United States Federal Trade Commission (FTC) rule and the United Kingdom’s consumer protection regime say, and is careful to separate the two, because they are different laws in different countries.
Why do regulators care about fake audience signals?
A brand that pays a creator is relying on signals: follower counts, views, ratings and testimonials. If those signals are manufactured, the brand, and ultimately the consumers who trust the recommendation, are misled. Regulators therefore look at two related things: fake reviews and testimonials, and fake indicators of social media influence. Neither is a new idea, but both have been written into more explicit rules in recent years. As elsewhere on this site, the law described below differs by country; nothing here applies universally.
What does the US FTC rule on reviews and testimonials cover?
The FTC announced its final rule on the use of consumer reviews and testimonials on 14 August 2024, by a 5-0 vote. According to the FTC, the rule bans:
- fake or false reviews and testimonials, including AI-generated ones, where a business knew or should have known they were fake;
- paying for reviews that are conditioned on a particular sentiment, positive or negative, whether stated outright or implied;
- undisclosed insider reviews, such as those from officers, managers or their relatives;
- misrepresenting a company-controlled website as an independent review source;
- review suppression, for example through groundless legal threats or intimidation; and
- the buying or selling of fake indicators of social media influence.
The FTC’s question-and-answer page for businesses says the rule took effect on 21 October 2024. The press release describes the timing as 60 days after publication in the Federal Register. The rule allows courts to impose civil penalties for knowing violations, and creates no private right of action. The FTC pages opened for this article did not state a penalty amount, so none is given here.
How does the rule treat fake followers and views?
The relevant provision, section 465.8 of the rule, concerns the misuse of fake indicators of social media influence. According to the FTC, these are indicators, such as followers or views, generated by bots, fake accounts, accounts using someone’s identity without consent or hijacked accounts, or otherwise not reflecting real activity. The ban applies where a buyer knew or should have known the indicators were fake and used them to misrepresent their influence for a commercial purpose.
Two points matter for reading it accurately. First, the knowledge condition is central: the FTC’s wording is “knew or should have known”. Second, the FTC’s business Q&A frames liability around businesses and those who sell fake reviews or indicators; it also states that ordinary consumers cannot be liable for what they say in reviews. How the rule applies to an individual creator in a particular case is a matter for the FTC and courts, and this article does not offer a view on it.
Who can be caught by the FTC rule?
According to the FTC’s Q&A, businesses are the main target, but the rule also reaches those who sell fake reviews, influencers who lie about using a product, and advertising agencies, PR firms, review brokers and reputation management companies. Businesses that simply host user reviews are generally not liable for them, though they can be for fake testimonials they publish in their own marketing. The FTC also says its staff guidance is not definitive and gives no safe harbour.
What does UK law say about fake reviews?
The UK picture is different in structure. The Digital Markets, Competition and Consumers Act 2024 (DMCC Act) brought a stronger consumer protection regime into force, and the Competition and Markets Authority (CMA) says its unfair commercial practices guidance applies to practices from 6 April 2025. Fake reviews and concealed incentivised reviews are among the “banned practices”, which the CMA’s collection page describes as automatically unfair and illegal.
The CMA says the law applies to anyone who creates, commissions, publishes or facilitates reviews or endorsements. It also says the CMA “can issue fines and directions directly to those who break consumer protection law”. The CMA pages opened for this article did not state fine amounts, so none is given here.
Is there a UK rule on buying followers?
The CMA’s guidance for content creators, last updated on 3 September 2025, does not mention fake followers or engagement. The UK material opened for this article concentrates on reviews, incentives and the labelling of endorsements rather than on bought audience numbers. Whether an inflated following could count as misleading under wider UK consumer law is not something those pages address, so this article does not claim that the UK has an equivalent of the FTC’s follower provision.
How do the two regimes compare?
| Question | US (FTC rule) | UK (CMA, DMCC Act) |
|---|---|---|
| Fake reviews and testimonials | Banned where the business knew or should have known | Banned practice, automatically unfair |
| Concealed incentives | Paid-for sentiment banned; insider reviews need disclosure | Concealed incentivised reviews are a banned practice |
| Fake followers or views | Specific provision on fake indicators of influence | Not covered in the creator guidance opened |
| Who enforces | FTC, seeking civil penalties for knowing violations | CMA, which can issue fines and directions |
| Private right of action | None under the rule | Not addressed in the pages opened |
The table summarises published regulator descriptions as of 16 October 2026; it is not a complete legal comparison.
What do UK platforms have to do about fake and hidden content?
The CMA’s principles for social media platforms, last updated on 28 August 2025, say platforms should take reasonable and proportionate steps to prevent fake reviews and reviews that hide their incentives, and should remove such content. The six principles include informing users of the rules and applying sanctions for breaches, giving creators tools to label content as advertising, using proactive detection, offering reporting routes, helping brands check that content about them is labelled and genuine, and removing confirmed violations with escalating sanctions.
The same page explains that an incentivised endorsement covers content where a brand pays a creator or where the creator has a commercial relationship, ownership stake or board role with the brand. Payment includes more than cash: free products, commission and event invitations count. Creators must label such content as advertising, and it must be recognisable as advertising as soon as the audience engages with it. For the UK labelling rules in practice, see our guide to influencer disclosure rules across the UK, US and EU.
What should creators and brands take from this?
Without giving advice, the published material points to a few themes:
- Treat audience figures as claims. If a number is used to win a deal, it should reflect real people. Our piece on how brands choose influencers beyond follower counts explains why marketers already look past the headline number.
- Keep sponsorship visible. Reviews and endorsements that hide a payment or gift are a target in both countries.
- Be wary of “review” arrangements that dictate the verdict. The FTC rule specifically addresses payment conditioned on sentiment.
- Know who is regulating. In the UK, complaints about advertising also reach the Advertising Standards Authority; see how the ASA handles complaints about influencer ads.
- Price on real value. A rate built on genuine reach holds up better under scrutiny; see our framework for setting sponsored content rates.
Conclusion: authenticity is now a compliance matter
Both the United States and the United Kingdom have moved to make faked reviews a regulatory issue, but through different tools: a specific FTC rule that also names fake social media indicators, and a UK regime that bans fake and concealed incentivised reviews within consumer law. Creators and brands working across borders should check the rule that applies to their audience and the regulator’s current guidance rather than assume one country’s position applies elsewhere.
This article is general information based on published regulator guidance as of 16 October 2026. It is not legal advice, and rules and platform policies change.
Sources: US Federal Trade Commission (Consumer Reviews and Testimonials Rule: Questions and Answers); US Federal Trade Commission (Federal Trade Commission Announces Final Rule Banning Fake Reviews and Testimonials); GOV.UK (Reviews and social media endorsements: what businesses and content creators must know); GOV.UK (Social media endorsements: guidance for content creators); GOV.UK (Reviews and endorsements: principles for social media platforms)
