Fake Journal Offers and Data Harvesting: How Predatory Publishers Mislead Researchers and Abuse Social Media

The flood of fraudulent journal solicitations on social media represents a serious threat to scientific integrity and the safety of researchers. This empirical study explores the academic publishing offers that circulate in public and private Facebook academic groups. A comprehensive corpus of 14,820 posts—including text announcements, graphic flyers, and video reels—was analyzed to verify journal indexing claims (such as Scopus, Web of Science, and PubMed) and audit covert user data harvesting practices. Out of 14,820 posts, 73.4% (n = 10,878) made verifiably fraudulent claims, most frequently advertising guaranteed fast-track Scopus indexing (61.2% of fake posts). Legitimate calls for papers (CFPs) were heavily cannibalized: deceptive posts achieved 7.49 times greater reach and 15.22 times more user comments by exploiting platform algorithms with manufactured urgency hooks ('publish in 48 hours'). Additionally, 52.8% of deceptive posts (n = 5,743) collected author phone numbers, emails and unpublished manuscript drafts through unsecured off-platform tools (Google forms, WhatsApp redirects and cloned portals). Early-career researchers aged 22–35 in Engineering and Medical sciences accounted for over 58% of vulnerable interactions. This paper presents the empirical baseline of this phenomenon and outlines practical platform governance and institutional remedies.