AI chatbots have been shown to be “inaccurate and evidently prejudiced” when providing election recommendations, the Dutch data protection authority (AP) has reported, issuing warnings about a potential threat to democratic processes just eight days before national elections.
Testing Reveals Repeated Partiality in AI Suggestions
The quartet of AI assistants tested by the AP “often end up with the same two parties”, irrespective of the user’s question or command, the watchdog noted in a analysis released ahead of the late October vote.
In more than half of the cases, the AI recommended either the right-wing PVV of Geert Wilders or the progressive GroenLinks-PvdA led by the ex-EU commissioner Frans Timmermans.
Some parties, such as the moderate CDA, “are almost never mentioned”, even when the user’s input precisely aligns with the positions of these parties, the study pointed out.
Authority Figure Cautions Against Using AI Chatbots for Election Advice
The vice-chair of the AP, Monique Verdier, stated that while chatbots may seem like clever tools, “for election guidance, they repeatedly fall short”. Voters were being pushed toward a party that did not necessarily align with their political views, she emphasized.
“This immediately affects a fundamental pillar of democracy: the integrity of free and fair elections,” said Verdier. “We thus caution against using AI chatbots for election recommendations, as their operation is unclear and difficult to verify.”
Election Context and Political Landscape
Netherlands citizens vote on 29 October in an election that will be keenly observed 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 appears to be narrowing, with numerous electors still undecided.
All major parties have ruled out an alliance with the PVV, implying 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 bots were not deliberately biased, and that their “noted flaws” are a result of the manner in which AI assistants function.
