(NED), the US Embassy, the Open Society Foundation (OSF), Facebook, and Google are some of the prominent international funders. Some regional cooperation between factchecking organizations is starting to emerge. In Kyrgyzstan, Factcheck.kg has worked with partners from Ukraine and Moldova, and has also received help from the Netherlands-based organization Bellingcat. In Latin America, fact-checking agencies have formed an alliance called Latam Chequea, consisting of thirty-four organizations from seventeen countries and coordinated by the agency Chequeado, from Argentina. Furthermore, international networks, like the Association for Progressive Communications (APC), the Electronic Frontier Foundation, and Reporters Without Borders (RSF), work alongside the regional coalition AlSur and nationally based organizations with a regional scope, such as Observacom in Uruguay, Cele in Argentina, and Derechos Digitales in Chile. Regional organizations also contribute to the work of international bodies. For example, Access Now, which is active in Latin America and the Caribbean, has given input into strategy discussions of the EU, UNESCO, and the UN’s Special Rapporteur for Freedom of Opinion and Expression. In the MENA region, a few large organizations and platforms that provide fact-checking services in Arabic have also been formed, including Agence France-Presse (AFP) Fact Check, Fatabyyano, Misbar, and others, and while most organizations in this region work on a national basis, some have a regional or even a global scope. A common challenge faced by fact-checking organizations is a lack of funding, which makes their long-term viability uncertain. The high dependency on donor funding or term-limited funds creates sustainability problems. In addition, these initiatives are often hamstrung by a shortage of human resources, not enough training, and the complexity of having to verify content in local languages. Structural problems also hamper their work, such as difficulties in accessing reliable information and data and the absence of, or inadequate, legal support and protection. Across the regions, fact checkers also report harassment and threats, making safety a concern for many, especially in the absence of legislation protecting them. These fact-checking organizations are often supported by international donors or supporters such as tech platforms (e.g. Google’s support for Latam Chequea), international media agencies (e.g. AFP’s global fact-checking network which also operates in the Global South), or Western I N FO R M ATI O N D I SO R D ER IN THE GLOBA L SOUTH governments (e.g. the US Embassy’s support of fact checkers in Latin America and Africa), which builds on longer-standing media development efforts in these regions. But in highly polarized political situations, fact-checking organizations receiving international donor funding also have to contend with accusations that they are not independent or objective, and in some cases they are surveilled by governments. The lack of formal policies to guide fact checking remains a challenge. Some organizations are members of the International Fact-Checking Network (IFCN)—in sub-Saharan Africa, this applies to most fact-checking organizations—and most are signatories to the standards of the IFCN and other local media councils. This means that there are strict correction policies which require these organizations to publicly account for any errors in the fact-checking process, and they are required to follow internationally recognized processes. Others, however, operate in a more ad hoc fashion. Although collaborations are starting to emerge, as are innovative ways of linking different issues together in response to information disorder, more coherent and cohesive efforts are still needed. Such holistic, collaborative efforts are especially necessary if organizations are to tackle information disorder in a proactive, constructive, and sustainable manner rather than in a reactive and ad hoc mode. ECOSYSTEM RESPONSES: LEGISLATION AND POLICY Ecosystem responses can also be noted across the regions, but these policy and legal responses are characterized by paradoxes. Several countries in the Global South have attempted to counter information disorder through legislation. Unfortunately, legislative responses have also been used more crudely, and not always with transparent intentions. In most Arab countries, accusations of “fake news” or “disinformation” are used as a pretext to suppress freedom of expression and silence government critics. Most of these countries have laws governing the media, electronic crime, and cybercrime that prohibit the spread of false news and punish those who publish it. The Covid-19 pandemic provided many countries with a motivation or pretext to tighten these laws. This has also been the case in the Asian region, Introduction – 1 7