AI chatbots have been shown to be “inaccurate and evidently prejudiced” when providing election recommendations, the Dutch data protection authority (AP) has stated, raising alarms about a possible risk to democracy just eight days before national elections.
Testing Reveals Repeated Partiality in AI Suggestions
The four chatbots evaluated by the authority “often end up with the same two parties”, irrespective of the user’s question or command, the regulator explained in a report published ahead of the late October vote.
In more than half of the cases, the AI recommended either the far-right Freedom party (PVV) of Geert Wilders or the progressive GroenLinks-PvdA headed by the ex-EU commissioner Frans Timmermans.
Some parties, such as the centre-right CDA, “are almost never mentioned”, even when the voter’s query precisely aligns with the positions of these parties, the study indicated.
Official Warns Against Using AI Chatbots for Voting Guidance
The deputy head of the AP, Monique Verdier, stated that while chatbots may seem like clever tools, “as a voting aid, they consistently fail”. Citizens were being steered toward a party that might not correspond to their political views, she emphasized.
“This immediately affects a cornerstone of democracy: the honesty of open and just votes,” Verdier stated. “We therefore warn against employing AI assistants for election recommendations, as their operation is unclear and difficult to verify.”
Voting Background and Political Landscape
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 right-leaning group of Wilders is leading the polls but the gap to the left-wing and centre-right parties appears to be narrowing, with numerous electors yet to make up their minds.
All major parties have ruled out an alliance with the Freedom party, implying the party that comes second is most likely to supply the future head of government.
Inadvertent Prejudice Attributed to Chatbot Functioning
The AP 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.
