Scammers impersonate FBI on social media, prey on crime victims ⁠67%

By Brandon Vigliarolo⁠43%

7/20/2026, 8:10:00 PM

BS Summary: This article contains 19 faulty reasoning types, including Indoctrination, Framing Effect, and Appeal to Authority, with Negativity Bias as the most egregious example at 45.1% saturation with 237 hits. Analysis detected 1,122 faulty-reasoning hits from 525 analyzed words, generating a BS Score of 60.3% and a BS Rank of ⁠67% (7,405 of 21,887 articles). This article is worse (more manipulative) than 66.20% of the article peer group.

Real FBI agents won't slide into your DMs and offer to help you recover stolen funds. 
The bureau's Internet Crime Complaint Center (IC3) updated an earlier warning on Monday about scammers impersonating the agency online, saying fraudsters continue to use the scheme "to deceive and revictimize individuals." 
According to IC3, there are two different schemes being used to target cybercrime victims, both directly and by soliciting them to report incidents. 
In the first scheme, IC3 said scammers create fraudulent social media profiles and pages impersonating FBI personnel or IC3. 
They may also infiltrate online groups for fraud victims or contact victims directly while claiming to represent the FBI or the complaint center. 
In other cases, victims are being contacted by someone claiming to be an FBI agent after realizing they were approached by someone trying to scam them and saying they intended to report the incident to the FBI or file an IC3 complaint. 
The FBI said the impersonator then directs victims to a fake IC3 website or continues communicating through messaging apps. 
In the other instance, scammers are creating AI-generated videos on social media depicting senior FBI officials and directing users to a spoofed IC3 website to report cybercrimes they may have fallen victim to, with the scammers then collecting the information and using it to contact victims for further fraud. 
AI-generated depictions of public figures are similarly being used to make such scams appear legitimate. 
“Some individuals received an email or a phone call, while others were approached, or observed an advertisement via social media or forums,” the IC3 said. 
“Almost all complainants indicated the scammers claimed to have recovered the victim's lost funds or offered to assist in recovering funds.” 
Regardless of how legitimate social media profiles look, or how realistic those AI-generated videos may be, the IC3 is warning that none of them should be believed for a simple reason: The IC3 doesn’t have a social media presence of any kind, and it doesn’t investigate crimes or offer to recover lost funds through social media. 
“Any social media profiles or pages claiming to represent IC3 or offering to recover lost money are fraudulent and are actively attempting to steal your personal or financial information,” the IC3 warned. 
“IC3 will never directly communicate with individuals via phone, email, social media, phone apps, online chat, or public forums.” 
MORE CONTEXT 
Attackers pummel critical WordPress vuln to create all sorts of mischief 
US cybercrime losses pass $20B for first time as AI boosts online fraud 
Ignore that FBI. 
We're the real FBI, says the FBI that's totally the FBI 
Extortion crews are visiting law firms pretending to be tech support, FBI warns 
The IC3 said that any contact made with a cybercrime victim who reports an incident via its actual website will be made by an FBI employee from a local field office or other law enforcement official. 
Here’s another hot tip: If you fall victim to a cybercrime or online scam, don’t post about it on social media - that’s only going to invite someone with bad intentions to seek you out. 
® 
Article reasoning-pattern comparisonThis article: 7.6%Brandon Vigliarolo: 5.3%The Register: 3.3%Confirmation Bias7.6%This article: 0.0%Brandon Vigliarolo: 1.2%The Register: 1.0%Anchoring Bias0.0%This article: 13.5%Brandon Vigliarolo: 2.9%The Register: 3.2%Availability Heuristic13.5%This article: 5.9%Brandon Vigliarolo: 0.4%The Register: 1.1%Representativeness Heuristic5.9%This article: 0.0%Brandon Vigliarolo: 0.1%The Register: 1.3%Hindsight Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Brandon Vigliarolo: 1.6%The Register: 2.3%Overconfidence Bias0.0%This article: 25.5%Brandon Vigliarolo: 6.9%The Register: 5.0%Framing Effect25.5%This article: 6.7%Brandon Vigliarolo: 1.2%The Register: 0.7%Loss Aversion6.7%This article: 0.0%Brandon Vigliarolo: 0.9%The Register: 0.8%Status Quo Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Brandon Vigliarolo: 0.2%The Register: 0.2%Sunk Cost Effect0.0%This article: 0.0%Brandon Vigliarolo: 2.0%The Register: 3.0%Optimism Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Brandon Vigliarolo: 4.5%The Register: 2.6%Pessimism Bias0.0%This article: 45.1%Brandon Vigliarolo: 5.4%The Register: 8.2%Negativity Bias45.1%This article: 0.0%Brandon Vigliarolo: 0.7%The Register: 1.9%Self-Serving Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Brandon Vigliarolo: 0.6%The Register: 0.8%Fundamental Attribution Error0.0%This article: 0.0%Brandon Vigliarolo: 0.0%The Register: 0.1%Actor-Observer Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Brandon Vigliarolo: 0.4%The Register: 0.4%In-Group Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Brandon Vigliarolo: 0.0%The Register: 0.4%Out-Group Homogeneity Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Brandon Vigliarolo: 0.8%The Register: 1.4%Halo Effect0.0%This article: 0.0%Brandon Vigliarolo: 0.1%The Register: 0.1%Horn Effect0.0%This article: 0.0%Brandon Vigliarolo: 0.0%The Register: 0.0%Dunning-Kruger Effect0.0%This article: 5.9%Brandon Vigliarolo: 2.1%The Register: 1.9%Recency Bias5.9%This article: 0.0%Brandon Vigliarolo: 0.1%The Register: 0.3%Primacy Effect0.0%This article: 0.0%Brandon Vigliarolo: 0.0%The Register: 0.1%Blind-Spot Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Brandon Vigliarolo: 1.5%The Register: 0.7%Ad Hominem0.0%This article: 0.0%Brandon Vigliarolo: 0.5%The Register: 0.2%Straw Man0.0%This article: 19.6%Brandon Vigliarolo: 3.7%The Register: 4.2%Appeal to Authority19.6%This article: 4.4%Brandon Vigliarolo: 1.0%The Register: 1.7%False Dilemma4.4%This article: 0.0%Brandon Vigliarolo: 2.8%The Register: 1.2%Slippery Slope0.0%This article: 2.1%Brandon Vigliarolo: 0.0%The Register: 0.1%Circular Reasoning2.1%This article: 16.8%Brandon Vigliarolo: 9.4%The Register: 6.2%Hasty Generalization16.8%This article: 0.6%Brandon Vigliarolo: 0.3%The Register: 0.3%Red Herring0.6%This article: 0.0%Brandon Vigliarolo: 1.1%The Register: 0.7%Bandwagon0.0%This article: 0.0%Brandon Vigliarolo: 2.2%The Register: 3.0%Appeal to Emotion0.0%This article: 10.7%Brandon Vigliarolo: 2.1%The Register: 0.9%Begging the Question10.7%This article: 2.5%Brandon Vigliarolo: 2.3%The Register: 2.0%Post Hoc (False Cause)2.5%This article: 0.0%Brandon Vigliarolo: 0.1%The Register: 0.2%Tu Quoque0.0%This article: 0.0%Brandon Vigliarolo: 0.5%The Register: 0.7%Burden of Proof0.0%This article: 0.0%Brandon Vigliarolo: 0.0%The Register: 0.2%Appeal to Nature0.0%This article: 0.0%Brandon Vigliarolo: 0.5%The Register: 0.3%Composition/Division0.0%This article: 0.0%Brandon Vigliarolo: 2.1%The Register: 2.2%Anecdotal0.0%This article: 3.0%Brandon Vigliarolo: 0.1%The Register: 0.0%No True Scotsman3.0%This article: 3.6%Brandon Vigliarolo: 1.1%The Register: 2.1%Ambiguity (Equivocation)3.6%This article: 0.0%Brandon Vigliarolo: 0.0%The Register: 0.0%Gambler’s Fallacy0.0%This article: 0.0%Brandon Vigliarolo: 0.0%The Register: 0.1%Middle Ground0.0%This article: 0.0%Brandon Vigliarolo: 0.0%The Register: 0.1%Personal Incredulity0.0%This article: 0.0%Brandon Vigliarolo: 0.0%The Register: 0.2%Special Pleading0.0%This article: 0.0%Brandon Vigliarolo: 0.1%The Register: 0.2%Genetic Fallacy0.0%This article: 10.7%Brandon Vigliarolo: 1.1%The Register: 2.3%Unattributed Quote10.7%This article: 0.0%Brandon Vigliarolo: 0.8%The Register: 1.3%Quote-first Misdirection0.0%This article: 1.9%Brandon Vigliarolo: 2.6%The Register: 7.3%Biased Writer Voice1.9%This article: 27.6%Brandon Vigliarolo: 1.6%The Register: 1.5%Indoctrination27.6%This article: 0.0%Brandon Vigliarolo: 0.3%The Register: 0.2%Politically Left Leaning Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Brandon Vigliarolo: 0.1%The Register: 0.1%Politically Right Leaning Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Brandon Vigliarolo: 1.5%The Register: 2.5%Attempt to Sell a Product or S…0.0%

525 words analyzed.

Speakers

2speakers58%attributed speech220writer words
Voice mapSelect a segment to jump to its words
Writer's voice • 10 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 16 words • 0.0% coverageInternet Crime Complaint Center (IC3) • 31 words • 100.0% coverageInternet Crime Complaint Center (IC3) • 23 words • 0.0% coverageInternet Crime Complaint Center (IC3) • 19 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 23 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 42 words • 0.0% coverageFBI • 19 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 49 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 15 words • 0.0% coverageInternet Crime Complaint Center (IC3) • 25 words • 100.0% coverageInternet Crime Complaint Center (IC3) • 21 words • 0.0% coverageInternet Crime Complaint Center (IC3) • 56 words • 100.0% coverageInternet Crime Complaint Center (IC3) • 32 words • 100.0% coverageInternet Crime Complaint Center (IC3) • 19 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 2 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 11 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 13 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 3 words • 100.0% coverageFBI • 11 words • 0.0% coverageFBI • 13 words • 0.0% coverageInternet Crime Complaint Center (IC3) • 36 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 35 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 1 words • 0.0% coverage
93%flagged-word coverage
262 attributed words86% of attributed speech80% writer coverage
0%22.5%45.0%Indoctrination+23.6 ptsWriter: 17.3%Internet Crime Complaint Center (IC3): 40.8%40.8%Unattributed Quote+21.4 ptsWriter: 0.0%Internet Crime Complaint Center (IC3): 21.4%21.4%Biased Writer Voice-4.5 ptsWriter: 4.5%Internet Crime Complaint Center (IC3): 0.0%0.0%

Attribution is sentence-level. Pattern percentages are calculated only from words assigned to that voice.

Loading…
Loading…
Loading…

Analysis

Hover over highlighted words in the article to view the associated bias or fallacy analysis.