Disinformation — the deliberate spreading of false or biased news to manipulate minds — is gaining ground around the world.
As China and Russia sink into authoritarianism and export their methods of censorship and media control, democracies find themselves overwhelmed by an incessant flow of propaganda that threatens the integrity of their institutions.
Taiwan, ranked first for democracy in Asia according to the Economist Intelligence Unit, is also the country that is targeted most by disinformation originating abroad, in this case China, the independent research institute V-Dem said.
The only bulwark against disinformation is a free, independent and plural media, prioritizing the public interest and conditioning the information it publishes on systematic verification of its sources.
However, Taiwanese media, which operate in a relatively free environment (Taiwan ranks 27th out of 180 in Reporters Without Borders’ [RSF] world press freedom ranking this year), too often neglect journalistic ethics for political or commercial reasons. As a result, only three in 10 Taiwanese say they trust the media according to a Reuters Institute survey conducted in 2022, one of the lowest percentages among democracies.
This climate of distrust gives disproportionate influence to platforms, in particular Facebook and Line, despite them being a major vector of false or biased information.
This credibility deficit for traditional media, a real Achilles heel of Taiwanese democracy, puts it at risk of being exploited for malicious purposes, with potentially dramatic consequences.
However, despite the urgency, no major reform has yet seen the light of day. It is true that in Taiwan any public policy affecting the supervision of the media systematically exposes its authors to the easy accusation of a “return to dictatorship.”
On the contrary, such a reform, if it adopted a co-regulation approach, returning journalism practitioners to their responsibilities, could ensure that the media as a whole serves the general public interest rather than that of their shareholders.
We suggest five areas of reform which seem easy to implement and would have a lasting impact:
First, adopt a regulatory framework that encourages and protects the independence of editorial staff vis-a-vis their employers and their boards of directors.
Second, expand the mandate of the broadcast regulator, the National Communications Commission (NCC), to cover all media, including print, online news sites and platforms, and strengthen its independence and resources.
Third, significantly increase, and maintain, the budgets allocated to public media so that they can benefit from the same visibility as private media and strengthen their guarantees of independence.
Fourth, support media outlets that are committed to respecting journalistic ethics, independent fact-checking initiatives and projects that aim to strengthen dialogue with the public.
Fifth, impose on large digital platforms an obligation of discoverability and appropriate moderation of reliable information sources, identified as such on the basis of an independent certification.
As part of a RSF delegation to Taiwan from Monday next week through Friday, we expect to meet President William Lai (賴清德), government and opposition officials, as well as a wide range of media and civil society representatives.
In these meetings we would emphasize the need for such reforms and introduce innovative solutions developed by RSF that can facilitate them, in particular the Forum on Information and Democracy, a laboratory for developing good practices; the Journalism Trust Initiative, the first media platform to receive a International Organization for Standardization certification; the Paris Charter on artificial intelligence and journalism; and the Propaganda Monitor, an observatory recently launched to analyze misinformation from authoritarian regimes.
We are convinced that Taiwan, a regional leader in press freedom and the only democracy in the Chinese-speaking world, has everything to gain from reforming its media regulations so that they are in line with international best practices.
It is at this price that Taiwanese media would regain public trust, a necessity not only to combat disinformation, but also to guarantee their own long-term survival in the face of the social media platforms’ hegemony. The future of journalism is linked to that of democracy and vice versa.
Thibaut Bruttin is the director-general of Reporters Without Borders. Cedric Alviani is the director of RSF’s Asia-Pacific bureau.
Having lived through former British prime minister Boris Johnson’s tumultuous and scandal-ridden administration, the last place I had expected to come face-to-face with “Mr Brexit” was in a hotel ballroom in Taipei. Should I have been so surprised? Over the past few years, Taiwan has unfortunately become the destination of choice for washed-up Western politicians to turn up long after their political careers have ended, making grandiose speeches in exchange for extraordinarily large paychecks far exceeding the annual salary of all but the wealthiest of Taiwan’s business tycoons. Taiwan’s pursuit of bygone politicians with little to no influence in their home
In a recent essay, “How Taiwan Lost Trump,” a former adviser to US President Donald Trump, Christian Whiton, accuses Taiwan of diplomatic incompetence — claiming Taipei failed to reach out to Trump, botched trade negotiations and mishandled its defense posture. Whiton’s narrative overlooks a fundamental truth: Taiwan was never in a position to “win” Trump’s favor in the first place. The playing field was asymmetrical from the outset, dominated by a transactional US president on one side and the looming threat of Chinese coercion on the other. From the outset of his second term, which began in January, Trump reaffirmed his
It is difficult not to agree with a few points stated by Christian Whiton in his article, “How Taiwan Lost Trump,” and yet the main idea is flawed. I am a Polish journalist who considers Taiwan her second home. I am conservative, and I might disagree with some social changes being promoted in Taiwan right now, especially the push for progressiveness backed by leftists from the West — we need to clean up our mess before blaming the Taiwanese. However, I would never think that those issues should dominate the West’s judgement of Taiwan’s geopolitical importance. The question is not whether
In 2025, it is easy to believe that Taiwan has always played a central role in various assessments of global national interests. But that is a mistaken belief. Taiwan’s position in the world and the international support it presently enjoys are relatively new and remain highly vulnerable to challenges from China. In the early 2000s, the George W. Bush Administration had plans to elevate bilateral relations and to boost Taiwan’s defense. It designated Taiwan as a non-NATO ally, and in 2001 made available to Taiwan a significant package of arms to enhance the island’s defenses including the submarines it long sought.
RSS