AI assistants are proving to be “inaccurate and evidently prejudiced” when offering voting advice, the Dutch data protection authority (AP) has stated, issuing warnings about a possible risk to democracy just eight days before national elections.
Testing Reveals Consistent Bias in Chatbot Recommendations
The four chatbots evaluated by the authority “frequently recommend identical two parties”, irrespective of the user’s question or command, the watchdog noted in a analysis published ahead of the 29 October election.
In more than half of the cases, the chatbot suggested either the right-wing PVV of the politician Geert Wilders or the leftwing GroenLinks-PvdA headed by the ex-EU commissioner Frans Timmermans.
Certain groups, such as the moderate CDA, “are rarely ever cited”, despite the fact that the user’s input exactly matches the stances of these parties, the study pointed out.
Official Warns Against Relying on AI Assistants for Voting Guidance
The deputy head of the data protection agency, Monique Verdier, stated that while AI assistants appear to be smart resources, “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 immediately affects a cornerstone of democracy: the honesty of open and just votes,” Verdier stated. “We thus caution against employing AI assistants for voting advice, as their operation is unclear and difficult to verify.”
Election Context and Political Landscape
Netherlands citizens vote on October 29 in an electoral contest that will be closely watched around Europe for the performance of the PVV.
The far-right party of Geert Wilders is leading the polls but the gap to the GroenLinks-PvdA and CDA appears to be narrowing, with numerous electors yet to make up their minds.
All major parties have rejected a coalition with the Freedom party, implying the runner-up party is most likely to supply the future head of government.
Inadvertent Prejudice Attributed to AI Operation
The AP 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.
