LETTERS: Social media influencers’ marketing has had a powerful impact on the way consumers perceive and engage with brands.
By leveraging personal connection and authenticity, influencers can shape opinions, drive trends, and influence purchasing decisions more effectively than traditional advertising.
Influencer advertising is powerful because it merges the personal touch of social connection with the persuasive force of marketing, allowing brands to reach audiences in authentic and engaging ways.
This has allowed businesses — especially smaller brands — to reach highly targeted audiences at relatively low cost.
However, the rise of influencer marketing has also blurred the line between personal recommendation and paid promotion, raising concerns about transparency, ethics, and consumer manipulation.
Recently, the rise of fraud, scams, promotion of unregulated or illegal offers, deep-fakes, and identity misuse in the fraudulent advertising of influencer marketing has resulted in significant financial losses for consumers, damaged brand reputations, and eroded public trust in online marketing and social media platforms.
Despite the lack of clear regulations specifically governing social media influencers and the limited accountability of online platforms, issues such as misleading or deceptive conduct, false representation, and unfair practices are regulated under the Consumer Protection Act 1999.
Under Part II of the Consumer Protection Act 1999, several sections govern these practices:
* Section 9 governs misleading conduct;
* Section 10 addresses false and misleading representations:
* Section 12 concerns misleading indication as to price;
* Section 13 covers bait advertising;
* Section 14 relates to gifts, prizes, free offers, etc.;
* Section 15 pertains to claims that goods are limited;
* Section 16 handles demanding or accepting payment without intending to supply; and,
* Section 17 addresses future services contracts.
Besides that, under Section 18 of the Consumer Protection Act 1999, it is a presumed liability that conduct or representation in relation to any goods or services made or published in an advertisement shall be deemed to have been made by (a) the person who directly or indirectly claims to supply the goods or services; (b) the person on whose behalf the advertisement is made; or, (c) both of them.
Basically, no person shall engage in misleading or deceptive conduct, false representation, and unfair practices, and doing so is an offence under Section 25 of the Consumer Protection Act 1999.
Section 25 of the Consumer Protection Act 1999 provides that any person who engages in misleading or deceptive conduct, false representation, and unfair practices commits an offence.
If the person is a corporate body, Section 25(1)(a) provides that the person committed shall, on conviction, be liable to a fine not exceeding RM250,000, and for a second and subsequent offence, to a fine not exceeding RM500,000.
For an individual who engages in misleading or deceptive conduct, false representation, and unfair practices, they shall be liable to a fine not exceeding RM100,000 or to imprisonment for a term not exceeding three years or to both, and for a subsequent offence, to a fine not exceeding RM250,000 or to imprisonment for a term not exceeding 6 years or both under Section 25(1)(b).
The Act clearly covers social media influencers’ marketing, but there is a lack of enforcement from the Domestic Trade and Cost of Living Ministry (KPDN), which has resulted in minimal oversight, weak deterrence against unethical practices, and continued misuse of influencer platforms for misleading or deceptive promotions.
Despite KPDN receiving 2,608 complaints in 2023 for misleading advertising and 1,281 complaints in 2022, there is still no one who has been convicted under the relevant sections of the Consumer Protection Act 1999.
While the Bukit Aman Criminal Investigation Department and the Communications and Multimedia Commission (MCMC) face challenges in their enforcement, coordinated enforcement efforts led by KPDN should be prioritised to safeguard our consumers.
DR ONG TZE CHIN
Senior lecturer
Faculty of Law
Universiti Malaya
The views expressed in this article are the author’s own and do not necessarily reflect those of the New Straits Times
© New Straits Times Press (M) Bhd
