Update. Here's a published article making a cluster of false claims about #OpenAccess journals: "In the OA model…costs are…covered by Article Processing Charges ( #APCs) paid by the authors ( #GoldOA); in relatively rare cases, some funders cover the full costs of a journal ( #DiamondOA) to make it free for readers and authors alike."
https://www.ssph-journal.org/journals/international-journal-of-public-health/articles/10.3389/ijph.2025.1608614/full

1. It claims that most OA journals charge APCs and that diamond OA journals are rare. But most OA journals do NOT charge APCs and diamond OA journals predominate.

Today the #DOAJ ( @DOAJ) lists 21,597 OA journals, of which 13,735 or 63.5% are diamond.
https://doaj.org/

2. It claims that at APC-based OA journals, APCs are (always) paid by authors. But while this tends to be true in the global south, even there it's only a tendency, not a universal truth. In the north, APCs are usually NOT paid by authors but by their funders or employers.
https://suber.pubpub.org/pub/j1jk6hu9

3. There are many ways to fund a diamond or non-APC OA journals, not just by having funders cover their costs.

BTW, this piece is called a "commentary" and might not have been peer-reviewed.

In the rest of the piece, the authors complain about misunderstandings of their journal.