AI assistants are proving to be “unreliable and clearly biased” when offering voting advice, the Dutch data protection authority (AP) has stated, issuing warnings about a possible risk to democracy just over a week before the country’s general election.
Testing Reveals Consistent Bias in Chatbot Recommendations
The four chatbots tested by the AP “frequently recommend identical two parties”, irrespective of the voter’s inquiry or input, the watchdog explained in a report published ahead of the 29 October election.
In more than half of the cases, the AI recommended 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 moderate CDA, “are rarely ever cited”, even when the voter’s query precisely aligns with the positions of these political entities, the study indicated.
Authority Figure Cautions Against Using AI Chatbots for Election Advice
The deputy head of the AP, Monique Verdier, commented that while chatbots may seem like clever tools, “for election guidance, they repeatedly fall short”. Citizens were being steered toward a party that might not correspond to their political views, she emphasized.
“This immediately affects a fundamental pillar of democracy: the honesty of open and just votes,” said Verdier. “We therefore warn against employing AI assistants for voting advice, 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 electoral contest 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 gap to the GroenLinks-PvdA and CDA appears to be narrowing, with many voters still undecided.
All major parties have rejected a coalition with the PVV, implying the party that comes second is most likely to supply the future head of government.
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.
