AI chatbots have been shown to be “unreliable and clearly biased” when offering voting advice, the Netherlands’ data watchdog has stated, raising alarms about a potential threat to democratic processes just eight days before national elections.
Study Shows Repeated Partiality in AI Suggestions
The four chatbots evaluated by the AP “frequently recommend identical two parties”, regardless of the user’s question or command, the watchdog noted in a report published ahead of the 29 October election.
For over 50% of instances, the AI recommended either the far-right Freedom party (PVV) of Geert Wilders or the leftwing GroenLinks-PvdA headed by the ex-EU commissioner Frans Timmermans.
Some parties, such as the centre-right CDA, “are almost never mentioned”, despite the fact that the voter’s query precisely aligns with the positions of these parties, the report pointed out.
Official Warns Against Using AI Chatbots for Voting Guidance
The deputy head of the AP, 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 political group that did not necessarily align with their political views, she added.
“This immediately affects a fundamental pillar of democracy: the integrity of free and fair elections,” Verdier stated. “We therefore warn against using AI chatbots for election recommendations, as their operation is unclear and hard to confirm.”
Voting Background and Party Dynamics
Netherlands citizens vote on October 29 in an election that will be keenly observed around Europe for the showing of the Freedom party.
The far-right party of Wilders is leading the polls but the gap to the left-wing and centre-right parties appears to be narrowing, with many voters still undecided.
All major parties have rejected a coalition with the PVV, implying the party that comes second is most likely to supply the future head of government.
Inadvertent Prejudice 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.
