AI assistants are proving 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 democratic processes just eight days before national elections.
Study Shows Repeated Partiality in AI Suggestions
The four chatbots evaluated by the authority “often end up with the same two parties”, irrespective of the user’s question or command, the regulator explained in a report published ahead of the late October vote.
For over 50% of instances, the chatbot suggested either the right-wing PVV of the politician Geert Wilders or the progressive GroenLinks-PvdA led by the ex-EU commissioner Frans Timmermans.
Some parties, such as the centre-right CDA, “are almost never mentioned”, even when the user’s input precisely aligns with the positions of these parties, the study pointed out.
Official Warns Against Using AI Chatbots for Election Advice
The vice-chair of the AP, the official Monique Verdier, commented that while chatbots may seem like clever tools, “for election guidance, they repeatedly fall short”. Citizens were being steered toward a political group that might not correspond to their political views, she emphasized.
“This immediately affects a fundamental pillar of democracy: the integrity of free and fair elections,” Verdier stated. “We thus caution against employing AI assistants 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 election that will be closely watched across the continent for the showing of the PVV.
The right-leaning group of Wilders is ahead in surveys but the lead over the GroenLinks-PvdA and CDA seems to be closing, with many voters yet to make up their minds.
All major parties have ruled out an alliance with the Freedom party, implying the party that comes second is highly probable to provide the next prime minister.
Inadvertent Prejudice Attributed to AI Operation
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.
