Listen to the article
Taiwan’s Largest Fact-Checker Faces “Existential Crisis” After Meta Funding Cut
Taiwan’s primary fact-checking organization is confronting a severe financial crisis following Meta’s decision to withdraw funding for anti-disinformation initiatives, according to a report published yesterday by Nikkei Asia.
The Taiwan FactCheck Center, established in 2018 to combat online misinformation, now finds itself in what the Japanese outlet described as an “existential crisis.” The organization has deliberately relied on private funding to maintain independence and avoid potential conflicts of interest with government entities.
Meta currently provides nearly half of the center’s operating revenue, with Google contributing more than 30 percent. This financial structure has been thrown into uncertainty after Meta CEO Mark Zuckerberg announced in January that the social media giant would terminate its partnerships with fact-checkers—a move widely interpreted as a concession to U.S. President Donald Trump, who has consistently characterized fact-checking as censorship.
“With the way things stand, our contract with Meta could expire in January 2026,” Taiwan FactCheck Center CEO Eve Chiu told Nikkei Asia. “Artificial intelligence continues to evolve and disinformation is becoming more sophisticated, so if funding is cut off, we will be in a critical situation.”
The timing of this financial uncertainty is particularly concerning as Taiwan prepares for local government elections in November 2025, a period when disinformation campaigns typically intensify. According to Taiwan’s National Security Bureau, reports of controversial or misleading information increased by 62 percent between 2023 and 2024, from 1.33 million cases to 2.16 million.
Taiwan’s vulnerability to disinformation is well-documented. The Sweden-based V-Dem Institute identifies the democratic island as the world’s largest target for coordinated disinformation operations, with China being the primary source of these campaigns. This makes robust fact-checking infrastructure particularly crucial for Taiwan’s information ecosystem.
The relationship between Meta and fact-checking organizations previously operated on a fee-based system, with partners reporting misleading content to Facebook in exchange for financial compensation. However, Zuckerberg’s January announcement signaled the end of this arrangement, with the CEO claiming that fact-checkers had become “too politically biased and have destroyed more trust than they have created.”
This statement came shortly after Trump’s second presidential inauguration and reflects the complex history between the former president and Meta’s platforms. Facebook temporarily suspended Trump’s account following the January 6, 2021, riots in Washington, citing his unfounded allegations of electoral fraud that contributed to the unrest.
The Taiwan FactCheck Center has reportedly reached out to Meta regarding continued financial support but has not received a response. The organization is now actively seeking alternative funding from Taiwanese private enterprises, though questions remain about whether domestic businesses can adequately replace the substantial support previously provided by Meta.
This funding crisis highlights the precarious nature of global fact-checking operations, which often rely heavily on support from the very technology platforms whose content they scrutinize. As AI technologies advance and make disinformation increasingly sophisticated and difficult to detect, the potential reduction in fact-checking capacity comes at a particularly dangerous moment for Taiwan’s information environment.
The situation also underscores broader tensions between commercial interests, political pressures, and the public good in the digital information landscape, especially in geopolitically sensitive regions like Taiwan where information integrity has direct implications for democratic processes and national security.
Fact Checker
Verify the accuracy of this article using The Disinformation Commission analysis and real-time sources.


27 Comments
Uranium names keep pushing higher—supply still tight into 2026.
Good point. Watching costs and grades closely.
Good point. Watching costs and grades closely.
I like the balance sheet here—less leverage than peers.
Uranium names keep pushing higher—supply still tight into 2026.
Silver leverage is strong here; beta cuts both ways though.
Good point. Watching costs and grades closely.
If AISC keeps dropping, this becomes investable for me.
Good point. Watching costs and grades closely.
Production mix shifting toward Fact Check might help margins if metals stay firm.
Good point. Watching costs and grades closely.
Uranium names keep pushing higher—supply still tight into 2026.
Good point. Watching costs and grades closely.
Production mix shifting toward Fact Check might help margins if metals stay firm.
Good point. Watching costs and grades closely.
Good point. Watching costs and grades closely.
Exploration results look promising, but permitting will be the key risk.
Uranium names keep pushing higher—supply still tight into 2026.
Good point. Watching costs and grades closely.
Good point. Watching costs and grades closely.
Silver leverage is strong here; beta cuts both ways though.
Good point. Watching costs and grades closely.
Good point. Watching costs and grades closely.
Nice to see insider buying—usually a good signal in this space.
Good point. Watching costs and grades closely.
Good point. Watching costs and grades closely.
Uranium names keep pushing higher—supply still tight into 2026.