AI assistants have been shown to be “inaccurate and evidently prejudiced” when offering voting advice, the Netherlands’ data watchdog has reported, issuing warnings about a possible risk to democracy just over a week before the country’s general election.
Study Shows Consistent Bias in Chatbot Recommendations
The four chatbots evaluated by the AP “often end up with the same two parties”, regardless of the user’s question or command, the watchdog explained in a analysis released ahead of the late October vote.
In more than half of the cases, the chatbot suggested either the right-wing PVV of Geert Wilders or the leftwing GroenLinks-PvdA led by the former European Commission vice-president Frans Timmermans.
Some parties, such as the centre-right CDA, “are rarely ever cited”, despite the fact that the voter’s query exactly matches the positions of these parties, the study indicated.
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”. Voters were being pushed toward a party that might not correspond to their ideological beliefs, she emphasized.
“This directly impacts a cornerstone of democracy: the integrity of free and fair elections,” said Verdier. “We therefore warn against employing AI assistants for voting advice, as their functioning is opaque and hard to confirm.”
Election Context and Political Landscape
Netherlands citizens vote on 29 October in an election that will be closely watched around Europe for the performance of the PVV.
The right-leaning group of Geert Wilders is leading the polls but the lead over the left-wing and centre-right parties seems to be closing, with numerous electors still undecided.
Every significant political faction have ruled out an alliance with the Freedom party, meaning the party that comes second is highly probable to provide the next prime minister.
Inadvertent Prejudice Attributed to Chatbot Functioning
The authority stressed that the AI systems were not intentionally prejudiced, and that their “noted flaws” are a consequence of the way AI chatbots operate.
