The National Security Bureau (NSB) found more than 1,200 videos on TikTok and YouTube — many from overseas accounts — discussing the Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) chair election and backing particular candidates. KMT heavyweight Jaw Shaw-kong (趙少康) has publicly accused “foreign forces” of interference, noting that many of these accounts were registered just before the party launched its election and originated abroad. Hau Lung-bin (郝龍斌) likewise said that he has been targeted by “external cyberwarriors” using fake accounts and artificial intelligence (AI) generated content. For perhaps the first time, major KMT figures are openly acknowledging disinformation from China as an influence on Taiwan’s internal affairs.
The danger of disinformation and cyberattacks is, of course, nothing new. Multiple studies confirm that Taiwan is among the top global targets for foreign-generated disinformation. According to the Varieties of Democracy (V-Dem) project, Taiwan has been rated the country most affected by disinformation for at least the past 11 years. Much of it originates from China, often through Hong Kong, which has become a hub for propagandistic content.
Unfortunately, efforts to combat disinformation have repeatedly become politicized. Labels such as “freedom of speech suppression,” “green camp censorship,” or warnings of a “red scare” are often used to discredit attempts to introduce stronger measures to counter disinformation.
Are we witnessing, then, a rare window for cross-party recognition of the threat disinformation poses to Taiwan’s democracy?
There is reason for cautious optimism, political polarization in the Legislative Yuan notwithstanding. The KMT’s recognition of foreign interference potentially opens a door. The Executive Yuan is discussing revisions to the legal framework to address foreign interference in internal party elections. Such conversations, even if they do not immediately result in new laws, help shift what topics are publicly acceptable to discuss.
Still, legal change alone can not solve the entire problem. Experience in other democracies shows that disinformation adapts rapidly: once laws are enacted, bad actors shift platforms, adjust tactics and exploit loopholes. Simply criminalizing false speech can chill legitimate dissent or lead to state overreach.
Furthermore, as the “bullshit asymmetry principle” reminds us, it takes far more time and effort to refute a falsehood than create one. Laws are unlikely to move as fast as the spread of lies.
Fortunately, Taiwan’s civil society has a strong ecosystem of fact-checking and media literacy. MyGoPen, the Taiwan FactCheck Center, Cofacts and DoubleThink Lab all work to debunk false claims while training citizens to recognize manipulation.
The Truth Matters 2024 Survey by Taiwan FactCheck Center and National Taiwan University’s Social Resilience Research Center found that 95 percent of Taiwanese respondents have encountered misinformation, and awareness of fact-checking tools is steadily increasing.
These civil-society initiatives continue to counter misleading narratives, foster a diverse media environment, and educate the public about the rapidly evolving tactics behind fake stories.
Yet most viewers scrolling through YouTube or TikTok do not usually pause to fact-check what they consume. It is hard to disrupt the algorithm. One of the upsides in this difficult battle is that the spread of disinformation often happens in interpersonal networks, such as group chats with friends or family.
As other communities’ experiences have shown, combating misinformation begins with connection, not correction. A US National Public Radio report highlights that people are more open to reconsidering false claims when approached through trust and curiosity rather than confrontation — an insight especially relevant for Taiwan’s close-knit community.
When your aunt shares a dubious video, shaming her might only push her away or make her defensive. A gentle question like: “Have you checked who produced this?” or “Do you trust this source?” might encourage her to consider the validity of the content. These warm, relational conversations are especially important if the misleading stories allegedly promote “our side.” They can become the quiet antidotes to the noise that endlessly circulates in our own echo chambers.
Disinformation is like junk food for the mind. Banning every misleading post is neither feasible nor democratic. Education and critical thinking are vital, but empathy is the catalyst that helps people pause long enough to “read the label before opening another bag of chips.”
A multi-pronged approach is thus essential: bipartisan legal reform where necessary, civic collaboration to promote media literacy, and, equally importantly, everyday conversations grounded in relationships, curiosity and mutual respect.
Lo Ming-cheng is a professor of sociology at the University of California, Davis, whose research addresses civil society, political cultures and medical sociology.
The Donald Trump administration’s approach to China broadly, and to cross-Strait relations in particular, remains a conundrum. The 2025 US National Security Strategy prioritized the defense of Taiwan in a way that surprised some observers of the Trump administration: “Deterring a conflict over Taiwan, ideally by preserving military overmatch, is a priority.” Two months later, Taiwan went entirely unmentioned in the US National Defense Strategy, as did military overmatch vis-a-vis China, giving renewed cause for concern. How to interpret these varying statements remains an open question. In both documents, the Indo-Pacific is listed as a second priority behind homeland defense and
Every analyst watching Iran’s succession crisis is asking who would replace supreme leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei. Yet, the real question is whether China has learned enough from the Persian Gulf to survive a war over Taiwan. Beijing purchases roughly 90 percent of Iran’s exported crude — some 1.61 million barrels per day last year — and holds a US$400 billion, 25-year cooperation agreement binding it to Tehran’s stability. However, this is not simply the story of a patron protecting an investment. China has spent years engineering a sanctions-evasion architecture that was never really about Iran — it was about Taiwan. The
For Taiwan, the ongoing US and Israeli strikes on Iranian targets are a warning signal: When a major power stretches the boundaries of self-defense, smaller states feel the tremors first. Taiwan’s security rests on two pillars: US deterrence and the credibility of international law. The first deters coercion from China. The second legitimizes Taiwan’s place in the international community. One is material. The other is moral. Both are indispensable. Under the UN Charter, force is lawful only in response to an armed attack or with UN Security Council authorization. Even pre-emptive self-defense — long debated — requires a demonstrably imminent
The conflict in the Middle East has been disrupting financial markets, raising concerns about rising inflationary pressures and global economic growth. One market that some investors are particularly worried about has not been heavily covered in the news: the private credit market. Even before the joint US-Israeli attacks on Iran on Feb. 28, global capital markets had faced growing structural pressure — the deteriorating funding conditions in the private credit market. The private credit market is where companies borrow funds directly from nonbank financial institutions such as asset management companies, insurance companies and private lending platforms. Its popularity has risen since
RSS