AI assistants have been shown to be “inaccurate and evidently prejudiced” when offering voting advice, the Dutch data protection authority (AP) has stated, raising alarms about a potential threat to democracy just over a week before national elections.
Study Shows Consistent Bias in AI Suggestions
The four chatbots tested by the authority “frequently recommend identical two parties”, regardless of the voter’s inquiry or input, the regulator noted in a report published ahead of the late October vote.
For over 50% of instances, the AI recommended either the far-right Freedom party (PVV) of the politician Geert Wilders or the leftwing 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 precisely aligns with the stances of these political entities, the study pointed out.
Authority Figure Cautions Against Relying on AI Assistants for Voting Guidance
The vice-chair of the AP, 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 ideological beliefs, she added.
“This immediately affects a cornerstone of democracy: the integrity of free and fair elections,” Verdier stated. “We therefore warn against using AI chatbots for voting advice, as their functioning is opaque and hard to confirm.”
Election Context and Party Dynamics
Netherlands citizens vote on 29 October in an election that will be keenly observed across the continent 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 seems to be closing, with many voters still undecided.
All major parties have rejected a coalition with the PVV, implying the runner-up party is highly probable to provide the next prime minister.
Inadvertent Prejudice Linked to Chatbot Functioning
The AP emphasised that the AI systems were not intentionally prejudiced, and that their “identified shortcomings” are a result of the manner in which AI assistants function.
