Financial Influencers: Should Platforms Be Liable?

<PodcastEmbed spotifyUrl="https://open.spotify.com/show/2REHyOBFQ8vPJM78atTU0y" appleUrl="https://podcasts.apple.com/us/podcast/rocket-agents-podcast/id1807401699" amazonUrl="https://music.amazon.com/podcasts/2d3fa50e-1d28-45fb-a6f9-5a9b5645f5e8/rocket-agents-podcast" />

⬇️ Prefer to listen instead? ⬇️

---

• ⚠️ The FSCA in South Africa now holds both influencers and sponsoring brands accountable for financial harm.
• 🧠 Social media algorithms prioritize sensational financial content, increasing misinformation risks.
• 💬 Platforms defend neutrality but may face legal shifts toward co-responsibility for harmful content.
• 🎯 Regulation may soon extend beyond influencers to content platforms themselves.
• 🌍 Nations like the UK, U.S., and Australia are considering similar crackdowns on financial misinformation.

Financial influencers have surged into the mainstream, transforming social media platforms into global hubs for advice on investing, trading, and money-making schemes. But as tales of financial ruin surface alongside viral videos promising overnight wealth, a critical question grows louder: should platforms like TikTok, Instagram, and YouTube be held liable for the content they amplify? As both regulatory bodies and public concern turn their gaze toward the infrastructure behind financial misinformation, the once-unthinkable is becoming inevitable—platforms may no longer be able to claim innocence through neutrality.

---

The FSCA’s Wake-Up Call: South Africa Sets a Global Precedent

South Africa's Financial Sector Conduct Authority (FSCA) took a bold step in 2024 by releasing new regulatory guidelines specifically targeting financial influencers. The rules were created in response to a growing number of scams, misleading investment advice, and unregulated financial promotions that had found a home on social media. The FSCA's proposition is straightforward but powerful: both the influencer delivering financial advice and the brand or entity supporting them are now jointly liable for any financial harm their content may cause (FSCA, 2024).

This new framework has three key components:

• Mandatory Disclosure: Influencers must clearly display their financial qualifications and state whether they’re licensed to give advice.
• Prohibition of Misleading Claims: Sensationalized or unverifiable claims about investment returns are strictly off-limits.
• Shared Accountability: Brands and influencers are legally bound to the outcomes their campaigns generate, introducing a new layer of consumer protection.

Why is this a watershed moment? Because it doesn’t just place responsibility on the influencer—it introduces actionable accountability across the promotional chain. If companies encourage promotional misinformation by sponsoring ill-advised creators, they’re no longer just "partners"—they’re legally involved actors.

Despite its forward-thinking structure, the FSCA’s policy highlights a glaring omission: the platforms themselves—where these influencers operate with reach and revenue—remain outside the regulatory crosshairs.

---

The Bigger Player: Are Platforms Getting a Free Pass?

Major social media platforms have become the dominant stage for financial influencers. TikTok’s #StockTok and YouTube’s personal finance vlogs rival traditional financial media outlets in reach. Platforms benefit in numerous ways:

• Ad Revenue: Monetized content, including financial advice, pumps ad views and profits.
• Creator Tools: Built-in features like tipping, livestream donations, and ad splits encourage creators to stay engaged.
• Brand Promotion: Influencers who drive traffic help sell platform-sponsored content packages.

Given this intertwined profit model, critics argue that platforms aren’t neutral players—they’re complicit enablers. They provide the tools that make financial misinformation scalable and, in many cases, boost this content using powerful recommendation algorithms.

Despite this, most platforms maintain that they are not publishers and therefore aren’t responsible for the accuracy of content. But legal and ethical lines are starting to blur. If a television network aired daily programming advising viewers to put their savings into dubious crypto tokens, regulators would act swiftly. So why do digital platforms remain untouched?

---

The Algorithm’s Role in Spreading Misinformation

At the core of the issue is the algorithmic engine driving modern content discovery. Social media algorithms reward engagement—clicks, comments, shares—not truth.

This design incentivizes high-drama, emotionally charged content, and unfortunately, many financial influencers have taken note. Videos that feature:

• Lavish lifestyle backdrops (mansions, cars, vacations)
• Grandiose claims (“turn $500 into $10,000 in 60 days”)
• Urgency tactics (“this opportunity won’t last!”)

consistently outperform sober, well-researched content.

More than just creating an echo chamber, the algorithm serves as an amplifier. If a user watches one dubious video about forex trading or meme stocks, similar content is promoted in bulk. This rabbit-hole effect traps viewers in a loop of misinformation, reinforcing beliefs that are often financially harmful.

Researchers suggest this is very much like how health misinformation spreads. In medicine, platforms have taken steps to verify and badge health content. So why hasn’t the same urgency been applied to financial content?

---

Platforms Playing Host—or Playing Dumb?

Social platforms tout themselves as open-stage providers—spaces where users can share, speak, and build communities. But this ideological mantle of free expression starts to crack under scrutiny when it comes to financial advice.

In traditional media, anyone giving financial guidance to the public must follow strict rules for licensing and compliance. On social platforms, virtually anyone can wake up, record a video with tips on derivatives trading, and reach millions of viewers by evening.

This unregulated pipeline has led to a surge in:

• Investment scams masquerading as tutorials
• Pump-and-dump schemes coordinated via influencer posts
• False credibility built on followers and likes, not qualifications

The result is a dangerous disconnect: information presented with the tone and confidence of a financial advisor, but with none of the accountability. It's worth asking: Should platforms allow this level of influence without responsibility?

---

The End of Neutral Platforms?

The principle of platform neutrality was built in an earlier digital era—one where websites served as message boards, not full-scale content ecosystems. Today’s platforms aren’t just passive hosts; they:

• Curate feed content
• Suggest accounts to follow
• Monetize posts and videos through partnerships
• Run internal promotions based on viewer metrics

This active shaping of the user experience raises questions about culpability. If a platform knows its algorithms are pushing dangerous or misleading financial advice—and continues to profit from it—can it truly claim neutrality?

Legal experts have started to look at models similar to those used in product liability cases. If a vehicle manufacturer knowingly sold a defective part, they’d face consequences. Some regulators are beginning to draw analogies in content ecosystems.

---

Financial Free Speech vs. Financial Harm: Where Is the Line?

Freedom of speech is a foundational principle of digital platforms. But where is the line between personal opinion and public harm?

Unlike discussions about politics or culture, financial misinformation can have immediate, measurable impact. A viral video encouraging viewers to stake their savings in an unregulated trading app isn’t just information—it’s an invitation to risk.

The aesthetic polish of these posts compounds the problem. A video with subtle music, glowing lighting, and hashtags like #wealthtips exudes legitimacy, especially to younger audiences. Behavioral economists note that people tend to trust visually appealing content—even when it's factually incorrect.

This isn't just a theoretical issue. Studies have shown that over 60% of Gen Z individuals use TikTok and YouTube as primary sources of financial advice, often trusting influencers more than traditional advisors.

If discussing health requires disclaimers, regulation, and credentialing—shouldn't money?

---

What’s at Stake for Platforms?

As regulators ramp up and public trust erodes, platforms that sidestep the issue could face growing challenges:

• 🚩 Reputation Risk: Publicized financial losses connected to platform content could damage trust.
• ⚖️ Legal Risk: Consumer protection lawsuits citing platform negligence are plausible.
• 📉 Advertiser Pullout: Brands may distance themselves from networks that inadvertently endorse harmful content.
• 📜 Government Oversight: Legislative bodies may enact regulation forcing platforms to adopt compliance measures.

The business incentive to change is now aligned with the ethical one. Allowing financial misinformation to flourish might yield short-term profits, but it’s a long-term liability.

---

Could Regulation Go Further? What Future Rules Might Look Like

The FSCA’s policies are just the beginning. The next wave of regulation may directly address platform mechanisms, creating industry-wide obligations.

Here are likely directions these future rules might take:

• Credential Verification Systems: Only verified, licensed individuals can post certain types of financial content.
• Content Badging Standards: Labels that show which content follows compliance guidelines—like how medical and COVID content gets flagged.
• Algorithm Transparency Requirements: Mandates for platforms to show how financial content is prioritized, and what controls are in place to limit harmful material.
• User Education Hubs: Built-in financial literacy resources for users who engage with investment-related content.
• Automated Detection Tools: AI-led scanning of keywords and script patterns that correlate with known scams or unreliable advice.

By implementing proactive features, platforms can move from liability risk to trusted partners in digital education.

---

Global Trends: Who Might Follow South Africa’s Lead?

South Africa may be first, but several regions are catching up:

• United Kingdom: The Financial Conduct Authority (FCA) has launched campaigns warning about "finfluencers" and launched formal inquiries into social media risks.
• United States: The Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) is investigating influencer-based pump-and-dump operations, with discussions on expanding oversight to platforms.
• Australia: Regulatory bodies are suggesting financial literacy campaigns with influencers and may look into joint liabilities.
• Southeast Asia: Countries like Indonesia and Malaysia, facing local crypto implosions, are tightening content moderation policies.

Global synchronization may be necessary. Financial content crosses borders easily, and inconsistent regulations create loopholes. Unified standards—perhaps via multinational coalitions—are likely on the horizon.

---

Implications for Brands and Marketers Using Influencer Campaigns

For brands eyeing influencer marketing in the financial sector, legal exposure is now a reality. Partnering with a financial content creator means potentially sharing liability if something goes wrong.

Best practices for brands now include:

• 📋 Due Diligence: Check influencer credentials, track record, and content history.
• 📢 Transparent Messaging: Require visible disclosures and legal disclaimers.
• 🧑‍🏫 Creator Education: Invest in training for influencer partners on compliance.
• 🔁 Ongoing Audits: Regularly review posts and engagement to identify problematic claims or trends.

Influencer campaigns in finance can still be effective—but they must shift from flashy collaborations to legally compliant partnerships.

---

How Content Platforms and SaaS Should Adapt

Technology providers are key in helping platforms, brands, and creators deal with the changing rules. Key support areas include:

• Compliance Automation: Built-in tools that scan for risky phrases like "guaranteed returns" or "no risk."
• Account Verification: Systems that prompt creators to upload credentials before posting financial content.
• Workflow Integration: Approval systems where brands can greenlight content before it goes live.
• Educational Dashboards: Tutorials, quizzes, and resource hubs to guide creators and marketers through compliance strategies.

The right SaaS tools make compliance less of a burden and more of a feature—encouraging responsible content by design.

---

A Call for Ethical Innovation from Tech and Content Providers

Beyond compliance, businesses must think about their role in shaping public understanding of finance.

Ethical innovation includes:

• 🔍 Refining Algorithms: Reduce weight on engagement alone; emphasize informational accuracy.
• 👏 Rewarding Credibility: Promote content from verified professionals with positive engagement histories.
• 🤝 Collaborating with Regulators: Offer data access and policy feedback channels to inform smarter rules.

The future of financial content online isn't just about profit—it’s about creating trust where things are confusing.

---

The Crackdown Is Coming—Are You Prepared?

Social media has changed how people access financial advice. With that disruption comes responsibility. As regulators like South Africa’s FSCA lead the charge, the era of unaccountable financial influence is fading. Platforms, creators, and brands must change or risk legal, financial, and reputation problems.

Now is the time to act. Whether it’s developing ethical algorithms, adjusting monetization strategies, or partnering with accredited creators, the path forward demands deliberate, responsible innovation. Because the next time a regulator asks why financial misinformation went viral, “we didn’t know” won’t be good enough.

---

References

Financial Sector Conduct Authority. (2024). South Africa releases new influencer marketing guidelines for financial promotions.