AI chatbots have been shown to be “unreliable and clearly biased” when providing election recommendations, the Dutch data protection authority (AP) has reported, raising alarms about a potential threat to democracy just eight days before the country’s general election.
Study Shows Consistent Bias in AI Suggestions
The four chatbots evaluated by the authority “often end up with the same two parties”, regardless of the voter’s inquiry or input, the regulator noted in a analysis published ahead of the late October vote.
In more than half of the cases, the chatbot suggested either the right-wing PVV of Geert Wilders or the progressive GroenLinks-PvdA headed by the ex-EU commissioner Frans Timmermans.
Certain groups, such as the moderate CDA, “are almost never mentioned”, even when the user’s input exactly matches the stances of these parties, the study pointed out.
Authority Figure Cautions Against Relying on AI Assistants for Election Advice
The vice-chair of the AP, the official Monique Verdier, stated that while chatbots may seem like clever tools, “as a voting aid, they consistently fail”. Citizens were being steered toward a party that did not necessarily align with their ideological beliefs, she added.
“This directly impacts a fundamental pillar of democracy: the integrity of free and fair elections,” Verdier stated. “We therefore warn against using AI chatbots for voting advice, as their operation is unclear and hard to confirm.”
Voting Background and Political Landscape
The Dutch head to the polls on 29 October in an election that will be keenly observed across the continent for the performance 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 numerous electors still undecided.
Every significant political faction have ruled out an alliance with the Freedom party, meaning the runner-up party is most likely to supply the future head of government.
Inadvertent Prejudice Linked to AI Operation
The authority stressed that the AI systems were not intentionally prejudiced, and that their “noted flaws” are a result of the manner in which AI assistants function.
