[crcn]

I tried to be as genuine as possible. My wording revolved around unsophisticated individuals who makeup a majority of Facebook. "Impersonation" perhaps isn't the proper word to use, but it certainly encompasses the general concern about promoted content.

To the eyes of an unsophisticated friend, I like penis waffles. For the record, I don't. I never liked anything similar, but Facebook re-posted a "like" (VICE) under my name, and attached a related article to attract more people (Penis Waffles).

Facebook doesn't make it clear that promoted content posted under your name is advertisement. On top of that, advertisements posted under your name is hidden from you, and visible only to your friends.

[matthuggins]

It does make it clear with the obvious "RELATED POST" language that is in capital letters between the "<user> likes <page>" and the post below it.

[uzusan]

The relatedness is very much up for debate though. If i like an article on a website, then later on that website publishes something else which is only related because its on the same site, does that mean facebook can re-use my like for the new page? Not only would i need to vet all the current content to see if there is something that i don't agree with, i would need to trust they would not post something horrible in future and have my name attached to it under a related post.

[crcn]

The unsophisticated user won't read "related post" because it isn't noticeable. There's no clear differentiation between a recycled "like" post, and one that you physically like. They look almost identical.