AI assistants are proving to be “unreliable and clearly biased” when offering voting advice, the Netherlands’ data watchdog has stated, issuing warnings about a potential threat to democracy just eight days before national elections.
Study Shows Repeated Partiality in Chatbot Recommendations
The quartet of AI assistants evaluated by the authority “frequently recommend identical two parties”, regardless of the voter’s inquiry or input, the regulator noted in a analysis published ahead of the 29 October election.
For over 50% of instances, the AI recommended either the right-wing PVV of the politician Geert Wilders or the progressive GroenLinks-PvdA led by the former European Commission vice-president Frans Timmermans.
Certain groups, such as the moderate CDA, “are almost never mentioned”, even when the voter’s query precisely aligns with the stances of these parties, the report indicated.
Official Warns Against Relying on AI Assistants for Voting Guidance
The deputy head of the AP, Monique Verdier, stated that while chatbots may seem like clever tools, “for election guidance, they repeatedly fall short”. Citizens were being steered toward a party that did not necessarily align with their political views, she emphasized.
“This directly impacts a fundamental pillar of democracy: the honesty of open and just votes,” said Verdier. “We thus caution against employing AI assistants for election recommendations, as their functioning is opaque and difficult to verify.”
Voting Background and Political Landscape
The Dutch head to the polls on October 29 in an electoral contest that will be keenly observed across the continent for the showing of the Freedom party.
The far-right party of Wilders is ahead in surveys but the lead over the GroenLinks-PvdA and CDA seems to be closing, with many voters still undecided.
Every significant political faction have ruled out an alliance with the PVV, meaning the party that comes second is highly probable to provide the next prime minister.
Inadvertent Prejudice Attributed to AI Operation
The authority stressed that the bots were not deliberately biased, and that their “identified shortcomings” are a consequence of the manner in which AI assistants function.
