AI chatbots are proving to be “unreliable and clearly biased” when offering voting advice, the Netherlands’ data watchdog has reported, raising alarms about a possible risk to democracy just over a week before the country’s general election.
Study Shows Repeated Partiality in AI Suggestions
The quartet of AI assistants evaluated by the AP “often end up with the same two parties”, irrespective of the user’s question or command, the watchdog explained in a report released ahead of the 29 October election.
In more than half of the cases, the chatbot suggested either the far-right Freedom party (PVV) of Geert Wilders or the progressive GroenLinks-PvdA headed by the ex-EU commissioner Frans Timmermans.
Certain groups, such as the centre-right CDA, “are almost never mentioned”, despite the fact that the voter’s query precisely aligns with the stances of these parties, the report pointed out.
Official Warns Against Using AI Chatbots for Election Advice
The deputy head of the AP, the official Monique Verdier, stated that while chatbots may seem like clever tools, “as a voting aid, they consistently fail”. Voters were being pushed toward a party that might not correspond to their political views, she added.
“This immediately affects a cornerstone of democracy: the honesty of open and just votes,” said Verdier. “We therefore warn against employing AI assistants for election recommendations, as their operation is unclear and difficult to verify.”
Election Context and Political Landscape
The Dutch head to the polls on October 29 in an electoral contest that will be keenly observed around Europe for the performance of the Freedom party.
The right-leaning group of Wilders is leading the polls but the lead over the left-wing and centre-right parties seems to be closing, with many voters still undecided.
All major parties have rejected a coalition with the PVV, meaning the runner-up party is most likely to supply the future head of government.
Unintentional Bias Linked to AI Operation
The authority stressed that the AI systems were not intentionally prejudiced, and that their “identified shortcomings” are a consequence of the manner in which AI assistants function.
