AI chatbots have been shown to be “inaccurate and evidently prejudiced” when offering voting advice, the Netherlands’ data watchdog has stated, raising alarms about a possible risk to democracy just over a week before the country’s general election.
Study Shows 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 watchdog noted in a analysis released ahead of the 29 October election.
For over 50% of instances, the chatbot suggested either the right-wing PVV of the politician Geert Wilders or the progressive GroenLinks-PvdA headed by the former European Commission vice-president Frans Timmermans.
Some parties, such as the moderate CDA, “are rarely ever cited”, even when the voter’s query precisely aligns with the stances of these parties, the report pointed out.
Official Warns Against Using AI Chatbots for Voting Guidance
The vice-chair of the AP, 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 political views, she added.
“This directly impacts a fundamental pillar of democracy: the honesty of open and just votes,” said Verdier. “We thus caution against using AI chatbots for election recommendations, as their operation is unclear and hard to confirm.”
Election Context and Party Dynamics
Netherlands citizens vote on 29 October in an electoral contest that will be closely watched across the continent for the showing of the Freedom party.
The right-leaning group of Wilders is leading the polls but the gap to the GroenLinks-PvdA and CDA seems to be closing, with many voters still undecided.
Every significant political faction have rejected a coalition with the Freedom party, implying the runner-up party is most likely to provide the next prime minister.
Unintentional Bias 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.
