AI assistants are proving to be “inaccurate and evidently prejudiced” when offering voting advice, the Dutch data protection authority (AP) has stated, raising alarms about a possible risk to democracy just over a week before national elections.
Study Shows Consistent Bias in Chatbot Recommendations
The quartet of AI assistants evaluated by the authority “often end up with the same two parties”, regardless of the user’s question or command, the watchdog noted in a report released ahead of the 29 October election.
In more than half of the cases, the AI recommended either the right-wing PVV of the politician Geert Wilders or the progressive GroenLinks-PvdA headed by the ex-EU commissioner Frans Timmermans.
Some parties, such as the moderate CDA, “are rarely ever cited”, even when the voter’s query precisely aligns with the stances of these parties, the report pointed out.
Authority Figure Cautions Against Relying on AI Assistants for Voting Guidance
The deputy head of the data protection agency, the official Monique Verdier, commented that while AI assistants appear to be smart resources, “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 directly impacts a cornerstone of democracy: the integrity of free and fair elections,” said Verdier. “We therefore warn against using AI chatbots for election recommendations, as their operation is unclear and hard to confirm.”
Election Context and Party Dynamics
Netherlands citizens vote on 29 October in an electoral contest that will be closely watched around Europe for the performance of the PVV.
The far-right party of 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 rejected a coalition with the PVV, meaning the runner-up party is highly probable to provide the next prime minister.
Unintentional Bias Attributed to Chatbot Functioning
The AP emphasised that the AI systems were not intentionally prejudiced, and that their “noted flaws” are a result of the manner in which AI assistants function.
