Taipei’s RightsCon 2025 Tackles the Global Disinformation Crisis
The battle against disinformation took center stage at RightsCon 2025 in Taipei, where ARTICLE 19 Europe and GIZ convened a panel of experts to dissect the multifaceted challenges facing media resilience and information integrity in the digital age. The discussion, held on February 25th, 2025, brought together representatives from Armenia, Moldova, Serbia, and the European Union, offering a diverse range of perspectives on the pervasive threat of disinformation and its corrosive impact on democratic values. The panelists underscored the urgent need to safeguard public discourse from manipulative narratives while carefully balancing these efforts with the fundamental right to freedom of expression. The conversation highlighted the sophisticated tactics employed by purveyors of disinformation, ranging from state-sponsored propaganda campaigns to politically motivated smears, and emphasized the critical role of cross-border cooperation, legal frameworks, and public awareness in combating this growing menace.
The discussion explored the diverse sources and manifestations of disinformation, examining case studies from Armenia, Moldova, and Serbia, while also considering the broader European context. The panel underscored how disinformation campaigns, often originating from external actors like Russia, but also frequently perpetrated by domestic political figures, are designed to undermine democratic processes, distort public perception, and fuel social polarization. These campaigns exploit both online and offline platforms, leveraging everything from traditional news outlets to entertainment programs and social media to disseminate misleading and manipulative content. The panel also highlighted how these tactics are increasingly used to attack journalists and public watchdogs, further eroding the foundations of a free and independent press.
Armenian lawyer Gevorg Hayrapetyan championed a collaborative approach to safeguarding information integrity, advocating for a multi-stakeholder effort involving governments, civil society organizations, and tech companies. He showcased Armenia’s proactive measures, including the Media Ethics Observatory, a self-regulatory body comprised of over 80 media organizations dedicated to monitoring and documenting disinformation. He further emphasized the importance of “soft tools” such as public awareness campaigns and educational initiatives to build societal resilience against disinformation. Hayrapetyan also called for legal harmonization efforts to adapt legislation to the rapidly evolving digital landscape while simultaneously upholding fundamental human rights. He proposed a comprehensive digital resilience program encompassing mandatory digital literacy education in schools, specialized training for journalists and policymakers, and robust cross-sector collaboration.
Moldova’s experience provided a stark example of external interference in the information space. Liliana Vițu, head of Moldova’s Audiovisual Council, detailed how Russia uses meticulously crafted propaganda campaigns to undermine Moldova’s European integration aspirations and promote pro-Russian narratives. These campaigns extend beyond traditional news channels, infiltrating entertainment programs, talk shows, and even movies. Vițu highlighted the concrete impact of this disinformation campaign on public opinion, referencing the narrow margin of victory in the European referendum. Following Russia’s invasion of Ukraine, Moldova implemented a partial ban on Russian TV programs propagating disinformation, war propaganda, and discriminatory rhetoric. Vițu explained Moldova’s efforts to combat disinformation, which include adopting a definition of disinformation based on the Lithuanian model, incorporating indicators of intent, falsehood, and potential harm to national security. She also noted the development of hate speech provisions within primary law to prevent arbitrary enforcement and ongoing engagement with online platforms to enhance strategic communication.
The discussion shifted to Serbia, where the primary source of disinformation originates from within the country. Raša Nedeljkov, an experienced fact-checker, revealed how Serbian politicians utilize manipulative tactics, smear campaigns, and false narratives to advance their political agendas and obscure abuses of power. He explained how disinformation creates a "parallel reality," hindering society’s ability to address genuine challenges. Nedeljkov emphasized that information integrity is a prerequisite for a functioning democracy, as elections, the rule of law, and human rights protection cannot thrive in a disinformation-ridden environment. He pointed out that disinformation in the Western Balkans permeates not only the online sphere but also pro-government mass media, including television programs. Nedeljkov highlighted a crucial issue: private companies inadvertently endorse disinformation by advertising on these channels, effectively funding the spread of false narratives. He detailed successful campaigns that persuaded advertisers to withdraw funding from disinformation-spreading outlets.
Lutz Guellner, drawing on his experience with the European Union, underscored the necessity of a collective, cross-border approach to combatting disinformation. He argued that the era of addressing this challenge solely at the national level is over, given the interconnected nature of the global information landscape. Guellner stressed that modern authoritarian regimes thrive not on outright lies, but on subtly manipulated narratives that often contain a kernel of truth, making them more difficult to debunk. He advocated for a "whole-of-government" and "whole-of-society" approach, integrating security, education, and digital policies to build resilience against disinformation. He highlighted the importance of the Digital Services Act (DSA) in this effort. Guellner addressed the delicate balance between combating disinformation and protecting freedom of expression. He acknowledged the risk that efforts to regulate content could be perceived as infringing on free speech. However, he emphasized that the current climate of openness has been exploited by malicious actors who weaponize speech to spread disinformation and incite hostility under the guise of promoting diverse opinions.
The session concluded with key takeaways emphasizing the need for collaborative action among governments, civil society, and media organizations to ensure access to accurate information. The panel stressed the importance of striking a balance between disinformation regulation and the protection of freedom of expression, ensuring that legal frameworks are not weaponized against journalists and public watchdogs. The cross-border nature of disinformation necessitates international cooperation to effectively counter manipulative practices. Public awareness and digital literacy were identified as crucial elements in building societal resilience against disinformation, empowering individuals to critically assess information. The role of advertisers in inadvertently funding disinformation was also highlighted, urging companies to avoid supporting media outlets that spread false narratives. Finally, the panelists underscored the responsibility of online platforms to implement policies that prevent the spread of disinformation. The session served as a call to action, emphasizing the urgent need for a multi-pronged approach to combat the disinformation crisis and protect the integrity of democratic values.