AI assistants are proving to be “unreliable and clearly biased” when offering voting advice, the Dutch data protection authority (AP) has reported, issuing warnings about a potential threat to democracy just eight days before the country’s general election.
Study Shows Consistent Bias in AI Suggestions
The four chatbots evaluated by the AP “often end up with the same two parties”, regardless of the voter’s inquiry or input, the regulator explained in a report published ahead of the 29 October election.
For over 50% of instances, the AI recommended either the right-wing PVV of Geert Wilders or the leftwing GroenLinks-PvdA led by the ex-EU commissioner Frans Timmermans.
Some parties, such as the centre-right CDA, “are almost never mentioned”, despite the fact that the voter’s query exactly matches the positions of these political entities, the report indicated.
Official Warns Against Using AI Chatbots for Election Advice
The vice-chair of the data protection agency, Monique Verdier, commented that while AI assistants appear to be smart resources, “as a voting aid, they consistently fail”. Voters were being pushed toward a political group that did not necessarily align with their political views, she added.
“This immediately affects a fundamental pillar of democracy: the integrity of free and fair elections,” Verdier stated. “We thus caution against using AI chatbots for election recommendations, as their operation is unclear and difficult to verify.”
Election Context and Party Dynamics
Netherlands citizens vote on October 29 in an electoral contest that will be closely watched around Europe for the showing of the Freedom party.
The far-right party of Geert Wilders is leading the polls but the lead over the left-wing and centre-right parties appears to be narrowing, with many voters yet to make up their minds.
All major parties have ruled out an alliance with the Freedom party, implying the runner-up party is highly probable to provide the next prime minister.
Inadvertent Prejudice Attributed to Chatbot Functioning
The authority emphasised that the bots were not deliberately biased, and that their “noted flaws” are a consequence of the way AI chatbots operate.
