AI assistants are proving to be “unreliable and clearly biased” when offering voting advice, the Netherlands’ data watchdog has reported, issuing warnings about a possible risk to democracy just eight days before the country’s general election.
Testing Reveals Consistent Bias in AI Suggestions
The quartet of AI assistants evaluated by the AP “frequently recommend identical two parties”, regardless of the voter’s inquiry or input, the regulator explained in a analysis released ahead of the 29 October election.
For over 50% of instances, the chatbot suggested either the right-wing PVV of Geert Wilders or the progressive GroenLinks-PvdA led by the former European Commission vice-president Frans Timmermans.
Some parties, such as the centre-right CDA, “are rarely ever cited”, even when the user’s input exactly matches the stances of these parties, the report pointed out.
Official Warns Against Using AI Chatbots for Voting Guidance
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 party that might not correspond to their ideological beliefs, she emphasized.
“This directly impacts a fundamental pillar of democracy: the honesty of open and just votes,” said Verdier. “We therefore warn against using AI chatbots for election recommendations, as their functioning is opaque and difficult to verify.”
Election Context and Party Dynamics
Netherlands citizens vote on 29 October in an electoral contest that will be keenly observed across the continent for the showing of the PVV.
The far-right party of Wilders is ahead in surveys but the lead over the GroenLinks-PvdA and CDA appears to be narrowing, with many voters yet to make up their minds.
Every significant political faction have rejected a coalition with the Freedom party, meaning the runner-up party is most likely to provide the next prime minister.
Inadvertent Prejudice Attributed to Chatbot Functioning
The AP emphasised that the AI systems were not intentionally prejudiced, and that their “noted flaws” are a result of the manner in which AI assistants function.
