John Chung-En Liu
Chia-Fen Lee- 1Department of Sociology, National Taiwan University, Taipei, Taiwan
- 2International Degree Program in Climate Change and Sustainable Development, National Taiwan University, Taipei, Taiwan
This study examines climate and energy misinformation in Taiwan using data from fact-checkers. Our findings highlight four primary themes: renewable delayism, distrust in power infrastructure, nuclear distraction, and misleading climate action. Renewable delayism exaggerates the limitations and negative impacts of renewable energy, particularly solar power, to delay its adoption. Distrust in power infrastructure spreads fear about the reliability and safety of Taiwan’s electric grid, undermining public confidence in government energy management. Nuclear distraction shifts focus from renewable energy to nuclear power and spreads misinformation about Japan’s nuclear wastewater. Misleading Climate action is a broad category that either caricatures climate advocacy or creates undue anxiety about the consequences of addressing climate change. Much of this misinformation originates from Chinese-speaking cyberspace, with some evidence of state-sponsored operations. These activities erode trust in climate and energy policies, create confusion, and potentially paralyze necessary actions. This study contributes to the broader literature by offering insights from a non-Western context and emphasizing the importance of considering local media environments in tackling climate misinformation.
1 Introduction
The proliferation of climate misinformation poses significant challenges globally, affecting public understanding, fueling political polarization, and undermining policy responses (Chinn et al., 2020; Cook et al., 2018; Dunlap and McCright, 2013). Despite extensive documentation of these issues in Western contexts, studies examining climate and energy misinformation in non-Western media landscapes are limited. Taiwan provides a particularly compelling case for investigation, as it is frequently targeted by foreign disinformation campaigns, especially from China, due to its unique geopolitical situation (Walsh, 2020; Rauchfleisch et al., 2023). Previous research has focused primarily on misinformation related to elections (Quirk, 2021; Shen, 2021), the Kansai Airport incident (Hartnett and Su, 2021), and COVID-19 (Chen et al., 2022; Lin, 2022), but the extent to which these operations intersect with energy and climate issues remains largely unexplored.
Adding to the complexity, Taiwan exhibits a notable contradiction in climate engagement: a high level of public awareness of climate change is paired with relatively low willingness to take action. According to the Yale University’s International Public Opinion on Climate Change report, while 93% of Taiwanese acknowledge climate change, only 59% prioritize it as a governmental concern, and a mere 15% express a strong willingness to participate in climate initiatives (Leiserowitz et al., 2023). This paradox underscores the importance of understanding how misinformation may contribute to public ambivalence and hinder progress on climate action.
Our study aims to fill this research gap by identifying the major themes and framings of climate and energy misinformation in Taiwan. Drawing from data provided by fact-checking organizations, we contribute to the growing body of literature on climate misinformation and climate obstruction (Treen et al., 2020; Vasist and Krishnan, 2023; Lewandowsky, 2021). Unlike previous research (Bloomfield and Tillery, 2019; Al-Rawi et al., 2021) reveals outright climate skepticism and denialism, we found most news items consist of various forms of climate delay (Lamb et al., 2020). Overall, the main themes are about controversies on domestic energy policies rather than climate change as a global issue. In addition, while a small number of misinformation cases show a transnational flow from Western media (McKie, 2021), most news items are tied to domestic events and some likely have originated from disinformation campaigns from the Chinese Communist Party. This research highlights the need for contextualizing climate and energy misinformation within local media environments.
The paper proceeds with a detailed methodology, followed by an analysis of the identified misinformation themes, and concludes with broader implications for climate misinformation research and policy.
2 Data and method
We use an innovative method that draws from fact-checkers—organizations or platforms that verify the accuracy of claims and identify misinformation—as data sources. So far, only Vu et al. (2023) has examined fact-checking content and climate change, and their geographic scope is limited to Anglophone countries and Germany (Vu et al., 2023). In Taiwan’s context, many misinformation activities spread through the instant communication social App “Line” (Hung et al., 2023), and given the structure of the app, it is more difficult to employ computational methods to detect misinformation content. Using fact-checkers as sources, we can capture the misinformation activities that are influential enough to be reported and fact-checked.
We draw from three distinct fact-checking organizations—the Taiwan FactCheck Foundation (TFC), MyGoPen (MGP), and Cofacts—as our data sources. Both TFC and MGP are non-profit entities that employ professional in-house teams to collate reliable information from reputable sources for fact-checking. They also allow users to report suspicious messages. Cofacts relies on user collaboration to crowdsource the reporting and verification of misinformation through an online platform. These organizations utilize varied methodologies and criteria for database inclusion, enabling a multidimensional approach to understanding misinformation dynamics.
We focus on 2018 to 2023 as our study period, during which all three platforms were operational. To construct the dataset, the authors, along with a research assistant, filtered relevant entries from three fact-checking websites using keyword searches related to energy and climate. The filtered items were compiled into a spreadsheet, with cross-checking among the research team to ensure completeness. The unit of analysis is a unique misinformation news item. As energy and climate issues are intricately connected in local debates, we focus on both terms when constructing our database. Throughout this process, we observed instances where the same news item was verified by all three organizations, indicating a consensus on its misinformation status. Conversely, some news were exclusively verified by a single organization, highlighting the diverse focus and verification criteria of each platform. We excluded items without definitive misleading content, ensuring the integrity of our database. Ultimately, this approach allowed us to compile a unique and comprehensive collection of misinformation news items to the subsequent analysis.
Our dataset encompasses 53 news items. Appendix 1 summarizes the brief news titles, the reported year, and fact-checkers. The researchers conducted an interpretative content analysis to collaboratively categorize the news items and uncover their deeper meanings. This approach allowed us to assess the narratives, strategies, and underlying messages embedded within the misinformation.
3 Results
Our investigation identified four misinformation themes: renewable delayism, distrust in power infrastructure, nuclear distraction, and misleading climate action. These themes are not clear-cut categories, but help us see the primary topics and framings in our dataset. Renewable delayism involves spreading exaggerated claims about the limitations or negative impacts of renewable energy—solar in particular—to delay its adoption. Distrust in power infrastructure fosters fear and mistrust concerning the reliability and safety of Taiwan’s electric grid, thus eroding public confidence in the government’s ability to manage energy systems effectively.
Nuclear distraction operates on two fronts: firstly, it diverts public focus from renewable energy solutions to an exclusive emphasis on nuclear power; secondly, it proliferates misinformation about Japan’s handling of nuclear wastewater, thereby impacting Taiwan’s relationship with a key ally. Lastly, misleading climate action revolves around mischaracterizing climate advocacy and sowing undue anxiety about the potential repercussions of addressing climate change, hindering proactive measures.
We will go through each theme with in-depth analysis and concrete examples in this section.
3.1 Renewable delayism
Sixteen distinct news items fall into this category. Our analysis revealed that solar energy is the most frequently targeted, particularly concerning its alleged environmental and health impacts. The dataset includes various instances of misinformation, such as claims that solar panels “breed mosquitoes that spread dengue fever,” “produce waste 300 times more toxic than nuclear waste,” and “contaminate nearby soil and water bodies with harmful chemicals.” Figure 1 presents dramatic visuals, including broken solar panels scattered across the ground and piles of dead fish near a water source. These visuals evoke strong emotional responses, such as fear and distrust toward solar energy. By combining these images with alarming claims about toxicity and environmental harm, the narratives aim to undermine trust in renewable energy sources.
Figure 1. Misinformation on solar panels as toxic waste.
Due to Taiwan’s dense population and limited land, the installation of solar panels often leads to land use conflicts, making it an easy target for misinformation. An illustrative example involves a video of a large-scale solar farm that falsely suggests solar development has gone awry in southern Taiwan (Figure 2). With the subtitle “When did the green land turn green energy?” the post implies that solar energy harms agriculture, resembles a mountain of garbage when decommissioned, and is a greater waste of money than nuclear energy. The video, featuring dramatic aerial shots of expansive solar panels, seeks to evoke a sense of environmental degradation and wastefulness. In reality, the video originated from TikTok and shows views from Guangdong province in China, clearly demonstrating an instance of disinformation.
Figure 2. Image of Solar Farms in China disguised as out-of-control development in Taiwan.
Some news employs scientific language to confuse the public. One prominent case is the allegation that solar panels induce “heat island effect,” claiming that temperatures around solar power plants are 3 to 4 degrees Celsius higher than in surrounding areas. This misinformation misrepresents research from the University of Maryland (Barron-Gafford et al., 2016) to suggest that solar panels hinder rainfall by altering local temperature and humidity conditions. This narrative is especially powerful during and after droughts, which have been particularly severe in Taiwan in recent years. Both politicians and local people have used this false narrative to question renewable development policies, making it a common issue faced by developers.
Besides solar energy, there are also a few cases targeting electric vehicles and offshore wind. Overall, the misinformation in this category aims to discredit renewable technologies. In Taiwan’s political context, these messages may not primarily aim to delay climate action but rather to undermine the Democratic Progressive Party’s (DPP) energy transition policies. However, their impact erodes public trust and the social legitimacy of renewable energy initiatives in Taiwan.
3.2 Distrust in power infrastructure
Taiwan’s power transmission and distribution rely on the state-owned Taipower Company, which has become a primary target for misinformation in this category. For instance, a widely circulated message claimed that “flexible power rationing in Taiwan will start in March with planned outages,” citing an official Taipower document as evidence (Figure 3). The inclusion of an official red seal and formal language lends it an air of authority, which amplifies its emotional impact and fuels public anxiety about Taiwan’s energy stability.This story even made the front page of the major newspaper United Daily. The disseminators added that “there’s not enough power because the government paused nuclear power.” However, the document in question describes a policy of “load management measures” for industrial users only, not relevant to individual users as insinuated by the message.
Figure 3. Official document on load management leading to misinformation on “planned outrage.”
Similarly, since 2017, a recurring message has stated that “starting tomorrow, the electricity bill will be divided into three stages. From 7 am to 1 pm, it’s 5 times the usual rate, from 1 pm to 3 pm, it’s 10 times the usual rate, and from 3 pm to 7 am the next day is the cheapest.” In reality, Taipower does not have time-of-use pricing for household users, and the company has had to repeatedly clarify this misinformation through its website and social media accounts. Another false message claims that Taipower has reduced the voltage, causing many household appliances to break down. These misinformation messages resonate particularly well as they relate to people’s daily lives, creating the impression that Taiwan faces an imminent power crunch.
Regarding the power system, we also observe many items focusing on coal-fired power plants in Taiwan. One claims that “excessive carbon dioxide from coal power generation is causing a greenhouse effect and preventing rain in Taiwan,” while another uses a fake video to accuse the Taichung Power Plant of spewing pollution that directly harms local communities. There is also a false claim that the government plans to add new coal-fired plants in the coming years. While phasing out coal is crucial in climate action, these news items are often presented to create political instability and influence public opinion against the ruling party.
3.3 Nuclear distractions
Nuclear energy has been the most contentious energy issue in Taiwan (Ho, 2018; Ho, 2023), and accounts for the largest number (20) of misinformation in our database. The ruling DPP has advanced the “2025 Nuclear-Free Homeland Plan,” aiming to decommission all of Taiwan’s nuclear reactors by 2025. On the other hand, the 2010s saw a wave of pro-nuclear activism, resulting in two referendums regarding Taiwan’s use of nuclear power (Shyu, 2024). Much of the misinformation has emerged from this background.
For example, some news items—by using fake information—specifically argue that the hazards of nuclear waste are exaggerated. One claims that China now monopolizes the technology to clean up nuclear waste and refuses to sell it to Japan and the United States—this piece likely originates from China’s content farms. Other pieces of misinformation allege that the DPP government has lied to the public, rejecting more advanced waste treatment technologies, or falsely claiming that nuclear waste is not hazardous and does not require protective gear.
Other misinformation is more nuanced, taking international trends out of context to make misleading claims such as “the COP 26 consensus repositions nuclear power as green energy” and “more than 20 countries agree to triple nuclear power from the 2020 level to ensure a stable energy supply.” This framing criticizes Taiwan’s renewable-heavy but nuclear-free decarbonization plan as unrealistic and dangerous. It also aligns with the distrust in the power infrastructure mentioned above, arguing that Taiwan’s energy system is unstable due to the nuclear phaseout. Such topics have dominated Taiwan’s political and public discussion on energy policy. While the position of nuclear energy in Taiwan’s grid is beyond the scope of this paper, these narratives can easily fixate on nuclear as the single solution and distract from renewable energy development through delay tactics.
On the other hand, there is a series of misinformation activities regarding the Japanese nuclear wastewater discharge incident around August 2023. While Japan’s decision remains controversial, many news stories have made false claims by fabricating sensational headlines, such as Japan’s nuclear wastewater causing “shrimps to mutate with legs on their backs” and “large-scale death of sardines,” making “sea salts and rainwater carcinogenic,” creating “visibly distinct pollution on the sea surface,” and rendering “seafood inedible.” These stories often come with striking images to enhance their visual impact.
It is worth noting that many of these news items draw from sources containing simplified Chinese, not used in Taiwan, suggesting they likely originate from the People’s Republic of China. According to the Taiwan FactCheck Foundation, the Chinese government systematically engages in disinformation campaigns on this topic (Taiwan FactCheck Foundation, 2023). These often originate from state media, are amplified by social media influencers, and reach Taiwan through political talk shows. These narratives also appear in Chinese diaspora communities in Southeast Asia and North America. Additionally, some misinformation aims to instill a sense of “US skepticism,” falsely claiming that BlackRock controls Tokyo Electric Power Co Inc. (TEPCO), thereby suggesting the US is the major beneficiary of related actions.
3.4 Misleading climate actions
While the majority of news items in our database do not directly pertain to climate change, a noteworthy minority explicitly addresses this issue. It is important to highlight that, aside from one report inaccurately asserting that “1,200 scientists signed a letter denying the climate emergency,” most news items in this category do not outright deny climate change. Instead, they engage in various forms of “climate delay” tactics. Compared to the other three categories we identified, this category notably contains the highest number of items that clearly originate from Western sources.
These entries frequently depict climate action as unreasonable or hypocritical, with a notable focus on the supposed impacts of our dietary practices on the environment. For instance, a dubious report from the unreliable “News Punch” source inaccurately states that the World Economic Forum is advocating for the mass slaughter of millions of pet cats and dogs to combat climate change. Greta Thunberg is another recurrent figure within this subset. For instance, one piece of news falsely claims that she urged Chinese citizens to abandon chopsticks to conserve trees. Another misrepresents the situation by using an incorrect photo to critique the substantial amount of trash left after her speech at the Glastonbury Festival, insinuating hypocrisy among climate activists. These examples highlight a deliberate strategy to undermine the credibility of climate advocacy.
On the other hand, as Taiwan has a vibrant Buddhist-inspired vegetarian climate campaign, it is possible that the campaign uses some misleading narratives to advance the cause. For example, one piece of misinformation alleges that all German government functions will exclusively offer vegetarian options, while another falsely claims that the World Health Organization has declared that the global population must turn vegetarian within 40 years to avert a climate catastrophe. Although research shows that reducing meat consumption can lower carbon emissions, overly biased statements may lead to pushback from different dietary groups.
4 Discussion
This article highlights how misinformation may impede Taiwan’s efforts to combat climate change by eroding public trust and fostering skepticism. In response to the pervasive spread of misinformation, Taiwan’s Energy Administration and the Taiwan Renewable Energy Alliance (TRENA) have both established a dedicated webpage to counteract false narratives. Similarly, Taipower, the state-owned power company, frequently finds itself in the position of having to debunk false information through its social media account. These efforts underscore the challenges that misinformation poses to public perception and policy implementation in the realm of energy and environmental action in Taiwan. Although there may not be a singular, defining event where misinformation has caused substantial damage, the cumulative effect of such activities undermines the social legitimacy of renewable energy sources and fosters skepticism regarding the government’s strategy for achieving a net-zero transition.
Our findings show that the majority of misinformation in Taiwan revolves around local controversies regarding renewable energy development and power infrastructure, making the topics more “local” than “global.” Of the more than 50 news items we collected, only one outrightly rejects the science of anthropogenic warming. Delay tactics, which aim to paralyze actions, are much more common. This finding is in line with other recent evidence regarding the growing misinformation regarding renewable energy, which highlights how false narratives can shape public perception and policy resistance (Winter et al., 2024; Benegal and Scruggs, 2024; Gonzalez and Knox, 2023; Paličková and Černoch, 2024). While we do not have definitive evidence to determine the origins of these news stories, we find a higher frequency of sources from Chinese-speaking cyberspace than from English-language sources.
Our analysis also indicates that much of the climate and energy-related misinformation in Taiwan is strategically aimed at undermining the Democratic Progressive Party (DPP)'s energy transition plan, depicting it as impractical or harmful to national interests. This politically motivated misinformation deepens partisan divides and erodes public trust in both renewable energy efforts and the overall stability of Taiwan’s power system. It is clear that the Chinese Communist Party (CCP) has vested interests in destabilizing the DPP, which advocates for Taiwan’s sovereignty. Narratives that discredit the DPP’s energy strategies align with broader CCP efforts to weaken public confidence in the ruling party.
The Taiwan Information Environment Research Center (IORG), a civil society organization that researches disinformation, corroborates that the CCP has engaged in operations aimed at undermining trust in Taiwan’s power infrastructure (IORG, 2024). By disseminating misleading narratives about electricity prices and power stability, these efforts create a negative impression of Taiwan’s government. In early 2024, at least eight manipulated narratives about electricity prices were identified, portraying the DPP’s policies as corrupt and inefficient. These tactics are part of a broader strategy to weaken democratic institutions by creating public discontent and fostering political polarization. Renewable energy is often scapegoated as the cause of grid failures and rising prices, aligning with efforts to erode public satisfaction and legitimacy around election periods to benefit the CCP’s agenda (Ho, 2024).
The Chinese sources also have distinct circulation routes compared to the climate denialist operations well-documented in the literature (Hung and Hung, 2022; Huang, 2023). The misleading narratives in Taiwan are often produced and amplified through a network consisting of China’s propaganda machine, state media, Taiwan’s pro-CCP media, and influencers. Besides traditional media, these news items were prominent on social media—Facebook and the instant communication app “LINE”—as well as video platforms such as YouTube and TikTok. As current climate communication literature mainly focuses on English-language cyberspace, our findings highlight the importance of paying attention to the media landscape of each country, particularly in languages other than English. This echoes Paličková and Černoch’s (2024) call to focus on state-backed operations and local dynamics in studying narrative adaptation and propagation (Paličková and Černoch, 2024).
This research is inherently exploratory and, as such, presents several notable limitations. Firstly, our study lacks detailed data on the popularity and reach of the misinformation instances identified. Additionally, information about the producers of this misinformation and the pathways through which it is disseminated remains elusive. Since our data is sourced exclusively from fact-checking websites, it is inherently selective, and filtered through the criteria and focus of these platforms. Consequently, the actual scale and diversity of misinformation concerning energy and climate issues in Taiwan are likely more extensive than depicted in this article.
5 Conclusion
This study highlights the pervasive impact of climate and energy misinformation in Taiwan, revealing its focus on local energy controversies and the significant role of Chinese-speaking cyberspace in spreading these narratives. By examining the various themes, we have shown how misinformation erodes public trust and hampers effective climate policies. Ultimately, our research contributes to the broader literature on climate misinformation by providing valuable insights from Taiwan, emphasizing the necessity of localized approaches to counteract misinformation effectively. Future research should continue exploring misinformation dynamics in different cultural and political contexts to develop comprehensive strategies for mitigating its impact globally.
Data availability statement
Publicly available datasets were analyzed in this study. This data can be found at the websites of Taiwan Fact Check Center, Cofacts, and MyGoPen.
Author contributions
JCEL: Conceptualization, Funding acquisition, Investigation, Methodology, Writing – original draft, Writing – review & editing. C-FL: Data curation, Investigation, Writing – review & editing.
Funding
The author(s) declare that financial support was received for the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article. This research is supported by Taiwan’s National Science and Technology Council (Grant number: 109-2410-H-002-007-MY3).
Acknowledgments
The author gratefully acknowledges the assistance provided by Shun-Nan Chiang and Yi-Chen Huang. Appreciation is also extended to the participants at events hosted by the Taiwan Environment and Planning Association, the Climate Change Social Science Network, and the Annual Conference of the Taiwan STS Association for their valuable insights and discussions.
Conflict of interest
The authors declare that the research was conducted in the absence of any commercial or financial relationships that could be construed as a potential conflict of interest.
Generative AI statement
The author(s) verify and take full responsibility for the use of Generative AI in the preparation of this manuscript. Generative AI was used ChatGPT 4 was used to improve language clarity and structure during the writing process. The authors are fully responsible for the accuracy and content of the manuscript.
Publisher’s note
All claims expressed in this article are solely those of the authors and do not necessarily represent those of their affiliated organizations, or those of the publisher, the editors and the reviewers. Any product that may be evaluated in this article, or claim that may be made by its manufacturer, is not guaranteed or endorsed by the publisher.
References
Al-Rawi, A., O’Keefe, D., Kane, O., and Bizimana, A.-J. (2021). Twitter’s fake news discourses around climate change and global warming. Front. Commun. 6:729818. doi: 10.3389/fcomm.2021.729818
Barron-Gafford, G. A., Minor, R. L., Allen, N. A., Cronin, A. D., Brooks, A. E., and Pavao-Zuckerman, M. A. (2016). The photovoltaic Heat Island effect: larger solar power plants increase local temperatures. Sci. Rep. 6:35070. doi: 10.1038/srep35070
Benegal, S., and Scruggs, L. (2024). Blame over blackouts: correcting partisan misinformation regarding renewable energy in the United States. Energy Res. Soc. Sci. 113:103543. doi: 10.1016/j.erss.2024.103543
Bloomfield, E. F., and Tillery, D. (2019). The circulation of climate change denial online: rhetorical and networking strategies on Facebook. Environ. Commun. 13, 23–34. doi: 10.1080/17524032.2018.1527378
Chen, Y. P., Chen, Y. Y., Yang, K. C., Lai, F., Huang, C. H., Chen, Y. N., et al. (2022). The prevalence and impact of fake news on COVID-19 vaccination in Taiwan: retrospective study of digital media. J. Med. Internet Res. 24:e36830. doi: 10.2196/36830
Chinn, S., Hart, P. S., and Soroka, S. (2020). Politicization and polarization in climate change news content, 1985-2017. Sci. Commun. 42, 112–129. doi: 10.1177/1075547019900290
Cook, J., Ellerton, P., and Kinkead, D. (2018). Deconstructing climate misinformation to identify reasoning errors. Environ. Res. Lett. 13:024018. doi: 10.1088/1748-9326/aaa49f
Dunlap, R. E., and McCright, A. M. (2013). Organized climate change denial. Oxford Handbook Climate Change Soc. 1, 144–160. doi: 10.4324/9780203876213.ch14
Gonzalez, T., and Knox, J. (2023). In the dark: the scapegoating of renewables after grid failures. Nat. Resour. J. 63:30.
Hartnett, S. J., and Su, C. (2021). Hacking, debating, and renewing democracy in Taiwan in the age of ‘post-truth’ communication. Taiwan J. Democr. 17, 21–43.
Ho, M. S. (2018). Taiwan’s anti-nuclear movement: the making of a militant citizen movement. J. Contemp. Asia 48, 445–464. doi: 10.1080/00472336.2017.1421251
Ho, M. S. (2023). Aiming for Achilles’ heel: a relational explanation of the ascendency of pro-nuclear activism in Taiwan, 2013-2020. Soc. Mov. Stud. 22, 628–647. doi: 10.1080/14742837.2021.1988912
Ho, M . Climate disinformation is compromising Taiwan’s efforts in defending democracy. The Diplomat. (2024). Available at: https://thediplomat.com/2024/10/climate-disinformation-is-compromising-taiwans-efforts-in-defending-democracy/ (Accessed November 9, 2024).
Huang, J. N. (2023). China's propaganda and disinformation operations in Taiwan: a sharp power perspective. China Int. J. 21, 143–170. doi: 10.1353/chn.2023.a898346
Hung, T. C., and Hung, T. W. (2022). How China's cognitive warfare works: a frontline perspective of Taiwan's anti-disinformation wars. J. Glob. Secur. Stud. 7:16. doi: 10.1093/jogss/ogac016
Hung, C. L., Lo, S. H., and Hu, Y. H. (2023). “Turning MIMS from a curse into a blessing: tripartite Partnership for Tackling Online False Information in Taiwan” in Mobile communication and online falsehoods in Asia: Trends, impact and practice. Ed. C. Soon (Dordrecht: Springer Netherlands), 305–320.
IORG (2024). Electricity prices, power shortages, and outages: recent trends in information manipulation and eight cases of misinformation in early 2024. IORG Weekly Report 80. Available at: https://iorg.tw/_en/da/80
Lamb, W. F., Mattioli, G., Levi, S., Roberts, J. T., Capstick, S., Creutzig, F., et al. (2020). Discourses of climate delay. Glob. Sustain. 3:3. doi: 10.1017/sus.2020.13
Leiserowitz, A., Verner, M., Goddard, E., Wood, E., Carman, J., Ordaz Reynoso, N., et al. (2023). International public opinion on climate change, 2023. New Haven, CT: Yale Program on Climate Change Communication.
Lewandowsky, S. (2021). Climate change disinformation and how to combat it. Annu. Rev. Public Health 42, 1–21. doi: 10.1146/annurev-publhealth-090419-102409
Lin, Y. C. J. (2022). Establishing legitimacy through the media and combating fake news on COVID-19: a case study of Taiwan. Chin. J. Commun. 15, 250–270. doi: 10.1080/17544750.2021.2011343
McKie, R. E. (2021). Obstruction, delay, and transnationalism: examining the online climate change counter-movement. Energy Res. Soc. Sci. 80:102217. doi: 10.1016/j.erss.2021.102217
Paličková, A., and Černoch, F. (2024). Gaslighting Europe: Russia's energy disinformation in the Czech Republic. Energy Res. Soc. Sci. 112:103497. doi: 10.1016/j.erss.2024.103497
Quirk, S. (2021). Lawfare in the disinformation age: Chinese interference in Taiwan's 2020 elections. Harv. Int. Law J. 62:525.
Rauchfleisch, A., Tseng, T. H., Kao, J. J., and Liu, Y. T. (2023). Taiwan’s public discourse about disinformation: the role of journalism, academia, and politics. J. Pract. 17, 2197–2217. doi: 10.1080/17512786.2022.2110928
Shen, P. (2021). How China initiates information operations against Taiwan. Taiwan Strateg. 12, 19–34.
Shyu, C. W. (2024). Referendum as a policy instrument to enhance energy democracy in formulating energy transition path, agenda, and policies: a case study of Taiwan's referendums in 2018 and 2021. Energy Policy 184:113914. doi: 10.1016/j.enpol.2023.113914
Taiwan FactCheck Foundation . Tracing Fukushima Treated Water Release. (2023). (unpublihsed report).
Treen, K. M., Williams, H. T., and O'Neill, S. J. (2020). Online misinformation about climate change. Wiley Interdiscip. Rev. Clim. Chang. 11:665. doi: 10.1002/wcc.665
Vasist, P. N., and Krishnan, S. (2023). Fake news and sustainability-focused innovations: a review of the literature and an agenda for future research. J. Clean. Prod. 388:135933. doi: 10.1016/j.jclepro.2023.135933
Vu, H. T., Baines, A., and Nguyen, N. (2023). Fact-checking climate change: an analysis of claims and verification practices by fact-checkers in four countries. J. Mass Commun. Q. 100, 286–307. doi: 10.1177/10776990221138058
Walsh, E. (2020). Disinformation in Taiwan: International versus domestic perpetrators : V-Dem. Available at: https://v-dem.net/weekly_graph/disinformation-in-taiwan-international-versus
Winter, K., Hornsey, M. J., Pummerer, L., and Sassenberg, K. (2024). Public agreement with misinformation about wind farms. Nat. Commun. 15:8888. doi: 10.1038/s41467-024-53278-2
Appendix 1
Table A1. Climate and energy misinformation in Taiwan.
Keywords: climate, energy, misinformation, Taiwan, China
Citation: Liu JCE and Lee C-F (2025) Climate and energy misinformation in Taiwan. Front. Commun. 9:1531126. doi: 10.3389/fcomm.2024.1531126
Edited by:
Will Grant, Australian National University, AustraliaReviewed by:
Joanna K. Huxster, Eckerd College, United StatesPatrick Murphy, Temple University, United States
Copyright © 2025 Liu and Lee. This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (CC BY). The use, distribution or reproduction in other forums is permitted, provided the original author(s) and the copyright owner(s) are credited and that the original publication in this journal is cited, in accordance with accepted academic practice. No use, distribution or reproduction is permitted which does not comply with these terms.
*Correspondence: John Chung-En Liu, Y2h1bmdlbmxpdUBudHUuZWR1LnR3