AI assistants are proving to be “unreliable and clearly biased” when offering voting advice, the Netherlands’ data watchdog has reported, raising alarms about a potential threat to democracy just eight days before national elections.
Study Shows Repeated Partiality in Chatbot Recommendations
The quartet of AI assistants tested by the AP “frequently recommend identical two parties”, regardless of the voter’s inquiry or input, the regulator noted in a report 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 the politician Geert Wilders or the leftwing GroenLinks-PvdA headed by the former European Commission vice-president Frans Timmermans.
Certain groups, such as the moderate CDA, “are rarely ever cited”, even when the voter’s query exactly matches the positions of these parties, the study indicated.
Authority Figure Cautions Against Relying on AI Assistants for Election Advice
The vice-chair of the data protection agency, the official Monique Verdier, stated that while chatbots may seem like clever tools, “as a voting aid, they consistently fail”. Voters were being pushed toward a party that might not correspond to their ideological beliefs, she emphasized.
“This immediately affects a cornerstone of democracy: the integrity of free and fair elections,” Verdier stated. “We thus caution against employing AI assistants for election recommendations, as their functioning is opaque and hard to confirm.”
Election Context and Party Dynamics
Netherlands citizens vote on October 29 in an election that will be closely watched across the continent for the showing of the Freedom party.
The far-right party of Geert Wilders is ahead in surveys but the gap to the GroenLinks-PvdA and CDA seems to be closing, with numerous electors yet to make up their minds.
All major parties have ruled out an alliance with the PVV, meaning the runner-up party is most likely to provide the next prime minister.
Unintentional Bias Attributed to Chatbot Functioning
The authority emphasised that the bots were not deliberately biased, and that their “noted flaws” are a result of the way AI chatbots operate.
