[DannyBee]

No, it wouldn't. There is civil fraud too.

Here's the basic black's law dictionary definition:

An intentional misrepresentation of material existing fact made by one person to another with knowledge of its falsity and for the purpose of inducing the other person to act, and upon which the other person relies with resulting injury or damage.

[AnimalMuppet]

Why would someone's number of followers be a "material fact"?

I mean, it might make me decide to listen to them a time or two. It won't for long, though - they need to say something worth hearing for that.

(Disclaimer: The previous paragraph is hypothetical. I don't do social media at all, so I don't follow anyone...)

[dragonwriter]

> Why would someone's number of followers be a "material fact"?

People buying followers are often competing for commercial opportunities for which social media influence is a key factor in what they are selling to the prospective buyer.

[CobrastanJorji]

What possible injury could result from my false belief that a Kardashian has four times the followers than she actually has?

[DannyBee]

You are apparently not imaginative enough :) Note that it includes indirect injury as well.

The most obvious one is that you could could spend money on her as an advertiser, over someone else.

But people are crazy. There are super-weird fact patterns in fraud cases out there.