AI chatbots have been shown to be “inaccurate and evidently prejudiced” when offering voting advice, the Netherlands’ data watchdog has stated, issuing warnings about a potential threat to democratic processes just over a week before national elections.
Study Shows Consistent Bias in AI Suggestions
The quartet of AI assistants tested by the AP “often end up with the same two parties”, regardless of the user’s question or command, the regulator noted in a report published ahead of the 29 October election.
For over 50% of instances, the chatbot suggested either the far-right Freedom party (PVV) of Geert Wilders or the leftwing GroenLinks-PvdA led by the ex-EU commissioner Frans Timmermans.
Some parties, such as the moderate CDA, “are almost never mentioned”, even when the user’s input exactly matches the stances of these political entities, the study indicated.
Authority Figure Cautions Against Using AI Chatbots for Election Advice
The deputy head of the AP, the official Monique Verdier, stated that while AI assistants appear to be smart resources, “for election guidance, they repeatedly fall short”. Voters were being pushed toward a party that did not necessarily align with their ideological beliefs, she emphasized.
“This immediately affects a cornerstone of democracy: the honesty of open and just votes,” Verdier stated. “We thus caution against using AI chatbots for voting advice, as their functioning is opaque and difficult to verify.”
Voting Background and Party Dynamics
The Dutch head to the polls on 29 October in an electoral contest that will be closely watched across the continent for the performance of the PVV.
The right-leaning group of Wilders is leading the polls but the lead over the GroenLinks-PvdA and CDA seems to be closing, with numerous electors still undecided.
Every significant political faction have rejected a coalition with the PVV, implying the party that comes second is highly probable to supply the future head of government.
Unintentional Bias Attributed to AI Operation
The authority emphasised that the AI systems were not intentionally prejudiced, and that their “noted flaws” are a result of the manner in which AI assistants function.
