AI chatbots have been shown to be “inaccurate and evidently prejudiced” when offering voting advice, the Netherlands’ data watchdog has stated, issuing warnings about a possible risk to democracy just eight days before the country’s general election.
Study Shows Repeated Partiality in Chatbot Recommendations
The quartet of AI assistants evaluated by the AP “frequently recommend identical two parties”, irrespective of the voter’s inquiry or input, the regulator explained in a analysis released ahead of the late October vote.
In more than half of the cases, 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 moderate CDA, “are almost never mentioned”, even when the user’s input exactly matches the positions of these parties, the report pointed out.
Official Warns Against Using AI Chatbots for Voting Guidance
The deputy head of the data protection agency, the official 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 added.
“This directly impacts a fundamental pillar of democracy: the honesty of open and just votes,” said Verdier. “We thus caution against using AI chatbots for voting advice, as their operation is unclear and difficult to verify.”
Voting Background and Political Landscape
The Dutch head to the polls on October 29 in an election that will be keenly observed across the continent for the performance of the PVV.
The right-leaning group of Wilders is ahead in surveys but the gap to the GroenLinks-PvdA and CDA appears to be narrowing, with numerous electors yet to make up their minds.
Every significant political faction have rejected a coalition with the Freedom party, implying the runner-up party is most likely to supply the future head of government.
Inadvertent Prejudice Linked to AI Operation
The authority emphasised that the bots were not deliberately biased, and that their “noted flaws” are a consequence of the way AI chatbots operate.
