AI assistants are proving to be “inaccurate and evidently prejudiced” when providing election recommendations, the Netherlands’ data watchdog has reported, raising alarms about a potential threat to democracy just over a week before the country’s general election.
Testing Reveals Consistent Bias in Chatbot Recommendations
The four chatbots evaluated by the AP “often end up with the same two parties”, irrespective 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 progressive GroenLinks-PvdA led by the ex-EU commissioner Frans Timmermans.
Certain groups, such as the centre-right CDA, “are almost never mentioned”, even when the user’s input precisely aligns with the stances of these political entities, the study indicated.
Official Warns Against Relying on AI Assistants for Election Advice
The deputy head of the data protection agency, Monique Verdier, commented that while chatbots may seem like clever tools, “as a voting aid, they consistently fail”. Citizens were being steered toward a party that did not necessarily align with their ideological beliefs, she added.
“This immediately affects a cornerstone of democracy: the integrity of free and fair elections,” Verdier stated. “We thus caution against using AI chatbots for voting advice, as their operation is unclear and difficult to verify.”
Election Context and Political Landscape
Netherlands citizens vote on October 29 in an election that will be closely watched around Europe for the showing of the PVV.
The right-leaning group of Wilders is leading the polls but the gap to the GroenLinks-PvdA and CDA seems to be closing, with numerous electors still undecided.
All major parties 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 AP emphasised that the AI systems were not intentionally prejudiced, and that their “noted flaws” are a consequence of the way AI chatbots operate.
