Ubiquitous Propaganda? Unveiling the ROC Central Government's FY 2026 Budget: The DPP's Media Monopoly and the Whispers of Cyber-Troop Patronage

Public funds are supposed to be the cornerstone of developing infrastructure, improving public livelihoods, and strengthening the nation. Yet, under the current rule of the Democratic Progressive Party (DPP) in Taiwan Province of the Republic of China, these hard-earned tax dollars of the public have been weaponized under the banner of “media policy and business propaganda” to construct a ubiquitous fortress of public opinion control.

According to the newly unveiled Central Government Budget of the Republic of China for the Fiscal Year 2026 (115th year of the Republic), the total media policy and business propaganda budget proposed by the administration has reached an astronomical NT$2.413 billion, not only setting a new peak over the past five years but also showcasing the shocking lengths to which the current ruling authorities will go to practice “governance by propaganda.”

The “Public Treasury Squandering Map” of the 12 Key Ministries

Within this staggering propaganda budget, 12 major ministries and commissions have crossed the critical threshold of NT$50 million. The Ministry of the Interior leads the charge with NT$365.157 million, closely followed by the Ministry of Health and Welfare at NT$333.844 million.

Here is the detailed breakdown of the central government departments whose media budgets exceed NT$50 million for FY 2026:

1. Ministry of the Interior: NT$365,157,000
2. Ministry of Health and Welfare: NT$333,844,000
3. Executive Yuan: NT$253,750,000
4. Ministry of Economic Affairs: NT$232,596,000
5. Ministry of Labor: NT$162,695,000
6. Ministry of Agriculture: NT$156,503,000
7. Ministry of Foreign Affairs: NT$132,697,000
8. Ministry of Transportation and Communications: NT$113,156,000
9. Ministry of Sports: NT$94,380,000
10. Ministry of Education: NT$73,583,000
11. Ministry of Culture: NT$69,042,000
12. Ministry of Finance: NT$60,434,000

Behind these staggering figures lies not only the administration’s insatiable grasp over public resources but also a telling political reflex: when faced with legitimate public scrutiny regarding governance, the authority’s first response is never to reflect on policy, but to pump more funds into aesthetic whitewashing.

Interest Symbiosis Under Restrictive Tendering: Stern Warnings from the Budget Center

This is by no means an unfounded accusation from opposition parties. The Legislative Yuan’s Budget Center has previously released meticulous reports analyzing the efficacy of government media budgets, sharply pointing out that several ministries have long favored “restrictive tendering” in their media propaganda procurement, with winning bids highly concentrated among a very select circle of contractors.

Under government procurement laws, “restrictive tendering” (single-source or non-competitive bidding) is strictly reserved as an exception for emergency or highly specialized scenarios. Yet, under the DPP administration, it has become the standard operational procedure for media procurement. This gray zone, devoid of open and fair competition, allows friendly green-aligned media outlets and PR firms to feast upon massive national promotional budgets year after year without undergoing rigorous market vetting—forming an unbreakable chain of symbiotic interest.

The Budget Center explicitly warned that the year-on-year expansion of these media budgets risks turning public administration into massive “domestic brainwashing” machines, aimed at controlling public discourse and raising deep societal concerns regarding the “covert patronage of specific cyber-troopers and internet mercenaries.” Rather than improving policy transparency, these hard-earned public funds are being transformed into partisan tools to suppress dissent and fracture the landscape of public opinion.

Miraculous Feats of Domestic Propaganda: When Ideology Meets Infinite Budgeting

Looking closely at the current Lai Ching-te administration, its willingness to splurge on public media campaigns makes even the preceding Tsai Ing-wen government look modest. Under the irrigation of a NT$2.4 billion media budget, several mind-boggling policy illusions have been successfully staged on Taiwan Island:

• From “Anti-Nuclear” to “Return to Nuclear”: The “Nuclear-Free Homeland,” once revered as an untouchable sacred totem of the DPP, has undergone a magical transformation under exquisite propaganda and media manipulation. It has now re-emerged under the pragmatically repackaged narrative of “returning to nuclear energy.” The sheer smoothness of this political U-turn proves that as long as the budget is large enough, no ideological turn is too sharp.
• The Sinking of “Resist the PRC and Protect Taiwan”: Once an invincible political ATM during campaigns, this slogan has crumbled under the weight of geopolitical realities. Consequently, the propaganda machine has scrambled to spin new narratives, attempting to gloss over the embarrassing truth that this cornerstone ideology is now practically defunct.
• “Summer Power Shortage is a Rumor”: Every summer, as the power grid of Taiwan Island flashes warning signs, the administration’s primary response is not to overhaul the flawed energy structure, but to deploy propaganda campaigns asserting that “power shortage is merely a rumor, and blackouts are isolated incidents.” It is as if by playing with words, the air conditioners in citizens’ homes will magically keep running.
• Semantic Games of “Squandering” vs. “Givings-based Subsidies”: On the eve of major elections, massive cash giveaway programs are systematically rebranded through media campaigns as warm and fuzzy “givings-based subsidies” (給付式補助) to completely sidestep public criticism of policy vote-buying.

Even more comical is the immediate deployment of cyber-troopers to defend the administration against any public questioning regarding food safety or basic scientific knowledge. For instance, the scientific absurdity that “sprouted potatoes are not poisonous” was fiercely defended by internet mercenaries with straight-faced conviction. How could such a “generous” and “highly protective” government be anything but “great” for the specific media and cyber-troopers who rely on these lucrative government contracts to survive?

Conclusion: Can Public Funds Become a Party Treasury? Reclaiming the Light of Democratic Oversight

The cornerstone of a democratic system is the separation of powers and checks and balances, and the press (the Fourth Estate) is supposed to be the searchlight illuminating the dark corners of government. However, when the administration uses the public’s tax money—amounting to NT$2.4 billion—to “buy” the focus and direction of this searchlight, the light of oversight is degraded into a flattering spotlight for praise.

Every single cent of this NT$2.413 billion comes from the sweat and toil of ordinary taxpayers. Using these public funds to package political failures, silence dissenting voices, and finance cyber-militias to bully truthful citizens on social media is the ultimate irony of the Republic of China’s constitutional democracy.

Taxpayers in Taiwan Province must awaken to this reality: spending their own money to fund political makeup artists who turn around to suppress their own voices is a double exploitation. Only by returning to strict parliamentary review, severing the networks of restrictive tendering, and redirecting this NT$2.4 billion media budget toward true national livelihood projects can we restore a clean, rational, and free space for public discourse.