Facebook: Over 83 million of our accounts are fake

As part of its first quarterly financial report as a publicly traded company, Facebook announced last week that it had 955 million monthly users worldwide. But does that tell the entire story? Perhaps not.

In a new and required filing made to the US Securities and Exchange Commission, Facebook admitted that 8.7 percent of its user base may have "fake" accounts on the service. That amounts to over 83 million of Facebook's monthly user base.

These fake accounts fall into three categories. One of them is duplicate accounts. In its filing, Facebook says they may account for 4.8 percent of its monthly user base. A person who has more than one Facebook account is in violation of the company's terms of service and Facebook says these still happen "despite our efforts to detect and suppress such behavior."

Another 2.4 percent of Facebook's subscriber base could have what the company calls "user-misclassified accounts". These happen when someone creates a personal profile for a business or organization, or for someone who wants to make a personal account for a pet or other "non-human entity."

Finally, yet another 1.5 percent of accounts are termed as "undesirable". Facebook says these subscribers create accounts "that we determine are intended to be used for purposes that violate our terms of service, such as spamming."

Source: SEC.gov

Report a problem with article
Previous Story

NeoBytes :) Twitter users go nuts over “iPhone 5 $800” rumour

Next Story

Microsoft hiring for temporary "holiday stores"

29 Comments

Commenting is disabled on this article.

Well maybe if Facebook didn't sign deals with other companies that force users of those other company's services to log into their services with a Facebook account, people wouldn't have a need to set up fake Facebook accounts...cough cough...Spotify, cough cough!!

Well, the Zuckerbergs themselves have an account/page for their pet. So why can't other people have them

GP007 said,
So hold on, FB has more fake accounts than G+ has active users?

I wish that was the headline.

"Facebook Has More Fake Accounts Than G+ Has Active Users"

yeah I can't stand when people make accounts for their pets.... just post the darn status updates from your profile, your dog doesn't need to post it

neufuse said,
yeah I can't stand when people make accounts for their pets.... just post the darn status updates from your profile, your dog doesn't need to post it

Those should be banned instantly. Also I've seen people make profiles for their kids who are around 3-8. Is that really unnecessary

The Laughing Man said,

Those should be banned instantly. Also I've seen people make profiles for their kids who are around 3-8. Is that really unnecessary

Even back in the college only days you'd have profiles for Hitler, George Bush, Winston Churchill, etc... but they use to remove those pretty fast... now days they don't seem to care to remove them

neufuse said,

Even back in the college only days you'd have profiles for Hitler, George Bush, Winston Churchill, etc... but they use to remove those pretty fast... now days they don't seem to care to remove them


Sometimes these fake profiles are quite fun, though (at least on Twitter as it's better suited (or intented to begin with) for spitting crazy oneliners).
My idea of solution would be labeling such fakes as Fake just as they do with verified accounts, but instead of promoting, this would remove them from searches. Only available with direct links.

neufuse said,
yeah I can't stand when people make accounts for their pets.... just post the darn status updates from your profile, your dog doesn't need to post it

Or how about when parents make Facebook accounts for their 3 year old child...

Kyle said,
So only 1.5% are fake people, the rest are just retarded.

ya 900million retarded people eh?? Just cause no one likes you enough to talk to you on facebook thats no need to lash out.

Kyle said,
So only 1.5% are fake people, the rest are just retarded.

So having a Facebook account means that you're retarded? Not quite sure how you got to that conclusion. You may not have a use for Facebook, but I do.

Kyle said,
So only 1.5% are fake people, the rest are just retarded.

Like e-mails, I have two facebook accounts.

One is for me, family, and friends. The other one is the one that I link to websites, apps, etc.

I guess I'm retarded for trying to keep posts I make onto more and more of these sites that require you to post with your facebook account from having my real name and picture next to my comment. You know, for when I need to troll...

Wait until online stores make you log in with your Facebook account, and they start sharing data analytics with them about the naughty things you buy from them!

Condere said,

Like e-mails, I have two facebook accounts.

One is for me, family, and friends. The other one is the one that I link to websites, apps, etc.

I guess I'm retarded for trying to keep posts I make onto more and more of these sites that require you to post with your facebook account from having my real name and picture next to my comment. You know, for when I need to troll...

The issue with this mentality is that if you are completely bypassing the reason that websites introduced that functionality. If your real name is attached to your account, you're less likely to troll, therefore creating nicer online communities.

And no, I'm not saying you're "retarded" for wanting privacy, I am saying that the act of having multiple accounts is useless and unneeded. Sort out your privacy settings or don't register on websites that don't keep up with your standards on privacy.

Kyle said,
You guys are retarded. The rest of that 8.7% are retarded.

Again with the term "retarded." Perhaps if you took the time to clearly pronounce your thoughts we wouldn't have been confused about what you were talking about?

Keeping on topic, duplicate accounts - while against the TOS - can serve a purpose for some people, as Condere pointed out. The 2.4% for user-misclassified accounts is to be expected over time, especially for the time before Facebook had pages for companies. The only part that I do agree is pretty silly is those people that create a Facebook account for their pet. There's just no need for that.

Intrinsica said,

Again with the term "retarded." Perhaps if you took the time to clearly pronounce your thoughts we wouldn't have been confused about what you were talking about?

Keeping on topic, duplicate accounts - while against the TOS - can serve a purpose for some people, as Condere pointed out. The 2.4% for user-misclassified accounts is to be expected over time, especially for the time before Facebook had pages for companies. The only part that I do agree is pretty silly is those people that create a Facebook account for their pet. There's just no need for that.

Woof Woof WoofWoofWoof Woof Woof Ba Wow Woof Woof....