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 possible risk to democracy just over a week before national elections.
Testing Reveals Repeated Partiality in AI Suggestions
The four chatbots tested by the authority “frequently recommend identical two parties”, irrespective of the voter’s inquiry or input, the regulator noted in a report released ahead of the late October vote.
In more than half of the cases, the AI recommended either the right-wing PVV of Geert Wilders or the leftwing GroenLinks-PvdA led by the former European Commission vice-president Frans Timmermans.
Certain groups, such as the moderate CDA, “are almost never mentioned”, even when the user’s input exactly matches the stances of these parties, the report indicated.
Official Warns Against Using AI Chatbots for Election Advice
The deputy head of the data protection agency, the official Monique Verdier, stated that while chatbots may seem like clever tools, “for election guidance, they repeatedly fall short”. Voters were being pushed toward a political group that did not necessarily align with their ideological beliefs, 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 hard to confirm.”
Voting Background and Political Landscape
The Dutch head to the polls on October 29 in an electoral contest that will be closely watched across the continent for the showing of the Freedom party.
The far-right party of Geert 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 Freedom party, meaning the runner-up party is most likely to supply the future head of government.
Inadvertent Prejudice Attributed to AI Operation
The authority emphasised that the bots were not deliberately biased, and that their “noted flaws” are a result of the manner in which AI assistants function.
