AI assistants have been shown to be “unreliable and clearly biased” when offering voting advice, the Dutch data protection authority (AP) has stated, raising alarms about a potential threat to democracy just over a week before the country’s general election.
Testing Reveals Repeated Partiality in Chatbot Recommendations
The four chatbots evaluated by the authority “frequently recommend identical two parties”, regardless of the user’s question or command, the watchdog 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 the politician Geert Wilders or the leftwing 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 exactly matches the stances of these parties, the study pointed out.
Official Warns Against Using AI Chatbots 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 might not correspond to their political views, she emphasized.
“This immediately affects a cornerstone of democracy: the integrity of free and fair elections,” Verdier stated. “We therefore warn against employing AI assistants for election recommendations, as their functioning is opaque and hard to confirm.”
Voting Background and Party Dynamics
Netherlands citizens vote on 29 October in an election that will be keenly observed across the continent for the performance 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 seems to be closing, with many voters yet to make up their minds.
All major parties have ruled out an alliance with the PVV, implying the runner-up party is most likely to provide the next prime minister.
Unintentional Bias Attributed to Chatbot Functioning
The authority stressed that the AI systems were not intentionally prejudiced, and that their “noted flaws” are a consequence of the manner in which AI assistants function.
