AI assistants have been shown to be “inaccurate and evidently prejudiced” when offering voting advice, the Netherlands’ data watchdog has reported, raising alarms about a possible risk to democracy just over a week before national elections.
Testing Reveals Consistent Bias in Chatbot Recommendations
The four chatbots tested by the AP “often end up with the same two parties”, irrespective of the voter’s inquiry or input, the regulator explained in a report released ahead of the 29 October election.
In more than half of the cases, 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 centre-right CDA, “are almost never mentioned”, despite the fact that the voter’s query precisely aligns with the positions of these parties, the report pointed out.
Authority Figure Cautions Against Relying on AI Assistants for Election Advice
The vice-chair of the data protection agency, the official Monique Verdier, commented that while chatbots may seem like clever tools, “as a voting aid, they consistently fail”. Voters were being pushed toward a party that did not necessarily align with their ideological beliefs, she added.
“This directly impacts a fundamental pillar of democracy: the honesty of open and just votes,” said Verdier. “We therefore warn against employing AI assistants for election recommendations, as their functioning is opaque and difficult to verify.”
Election Context and Party Dynamics
The Dutch head to the polls on October 29 in an election that will be keenly observed across the continent for the performance of the PVV.
The right-leaning group of Wilders is leading the polls but the gap to the left-wing and centre-right parties seems to be closing, with many voters still undecided.
All major parties have ruled out an alliance with the PVV, implying the party that comes second is most likely to provide the next prime minister.
Inadvertent Prejudice Linked to Chatbot Functioning
The authority emphasised that the AI systems were not intentionally prejudiced, and that their “noted flaws” are a consequence of the way AI chatbots operate.
