Technology has transformed so many areas of our lives and relatively quickly in the grand scheme of things. From tech used to make education more accessible, for example, to the ever talked about artificial intelligence (AI) shaping many sectors, the way tech has integrated with the modern world both seamlessly and speedily is notable.
One area where technology has reshaped experience is online dating. Dating isn’t the same now as it was even 10 or 15 years ago. In fact, in many ways, it’s a whole new ballgame altogether. The biggest shift? The pandemic, according to panellists at a discussion held at Tech Show London last week on the 12th March 2025 at ExCeL London. The pandemic sent many hopeful daters online to find love, but with that came an uptick in opportunistic cybercriminals waiting to exploit them in a game where vulnerability is often encouraged. So, how can we make dating scams less attractive?
This is exactly the question debated by Simon Newman, CEO of the Online Dating and Discovery Association (ODDA), and Becky Holmes, author of (the exceptionally named) Keanu Reeves Is Not In Love With You, in a panel discussion (moderated by broadcaster and researcher Stephanie Hare) entitled Swipe Left on Romance Scams: Combating Romance Fraud Through Ethical App Design and Communication at Tech Show London.
The panellists noted that there’s a fine balance between user experience and safety, both paramount to the experiences of online daters. Trust and safety at all stages are key, but also keeping dating fun is important. None of these things can or should be compromised. This provides dating apps and sites with a tricky situation. What we need is more friction, according to Simon and Becky.
In Defence of Friction
On the whole, app designers want to reduce friction. However, friction can be good for safety. What is meant by ‘friction’ here is extra checks to keep people safe and verify identity. This might include ID verification, image verification checks and AI and deepfake prevention measures. There are lots of areas where we’re already really good at preventing fraud, like online banking, for example, noted the panel. This friction is important for consumers.
Whilst ‘friction’ (i.e. verifications) may seem like a roadblock now, with the rate that tech evolves at, this process will, no doubt, become quicker and more seamless. However, it has to be the right kind of friction; rather than long, lecturing T&Cs or safety guides. The makers of these apps have a responsibility of engagement with safety measures, too. They have to be engaging and consumer friendly, at the least.
Accountability
Fraudsters want to get you off the apps as quickly as possible, ultimately aiming for encrypted messaging services. Which brings us to a misconception about dating scams: most dating related scams happen off the apps. In fact, you’re more likely to be targeted on social media.
It’s important that we ask questions about safety to the teams behind any of the apps that we’re using to connect with others, whether that’s a dating app or social media.
The Online Safety Act has ushered in some good changes to hold organisations accountable for user safety. The Online Safety Act emphasises age verification, particularly for services or sites that might be accessed by children. It also means that online dating and social media sites have a ‘duty of care’ to protect users from harmful or illegal content.
Deepfakes?
According to the panellists, one area where we’re seeing significant uptick in scam sophistication is deepfakes and deepfake content. The technology isn’t necessarily able to keep up with the rate of innovation at the moment, posing a worrying situation for dating app teams. “A year or two ago it was relatively easy to spot a deepfake, but now it’s really hard. We have to rely on tech to spot this as human capabilities are diminishing,” said Newman. The answer? Education. In this case, fraudsters are one step ahead. Deepfakes join classic phishing and spear phishing as significant cyber risks for online daters.
So, what should people do to protect themselves? And how can organisations protect users?
The panellists debated a range of potential solutions, but noted that it’s really tricky to put tech in place between lovers (or people who believe they’re in a relationship). Cybercriminals and fraudsters emotionally manipulate victims into believing that they’re genuinely in relationships. The panel noted that being able to report bad experiences directly to sites is important.
One audience member suggested an AirBnB style ratings system of potential dates, to which the panel noted that there are some sites in the US that require others to ‘vouch’ for users. With that being said, the panel noted that US Congress has pledged a Romance Scam Prevention Act to “require online dating service providers to provide fraud ban notifications to online dating service members, and for other purposes”. This would require sites to notify users if they’re interacting with anyone flagged as a fraudster.
The panel also noted that educating users to be savvy against scams is important, stressing that there’s no ‘typical’ image of a fraudster.
Finally, Simon Newman noted that users should keep an eye out for the trusted Online Dating and Discovery Association kitemark when looking for love online. The website also has a ‘Check A Service’ tool to see if a site is a ODDA member, as members have to stick to strict guidelines on user safety. The website also features advice on how to avoid scams online, too.
