AI assistants have been shown to be “unreliable and clearly biased” when providing election recommendations, the Dutch data protection authority (AP) has stated, raising alarms about a possible risk to democratic processes just over a week before the country’s general election.
Study Shows Repeated Partiality in Chatbot Recommendations
The four chatbots evaluated by the AP “frequently recommend identical two parties”, regardless of the user’s question or command, the regulator explained in a analysis published ahead of the 29 October election.
In more than half of the cases, 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.
Some parties, such as the moderate CDA, “are rarely ever cited”, despite the fact that the voter’s query precisely aligns with the stances of these political entities, the study pointed out.
Authority Figure Cautions Against Relying on AI Assistants for Election Advice
The vice-chair of the data protection agency, the official Monique Verdier, commented that while chatbots may seem like clever tools, “as a voting aid, they consistently fail”. Voters were being pushed toward a political group that did not necessarily align with their political views, she added.
“This immediately affects a fundamental pillar of democracy: the integrity of free and fair elections,” Verdier stated. “We thus caution against using AI chatbots for voting advice, as their operation is unclear and hard to confirm.”
Election Context and Political Landscape
Netherlands citizens vote on 29 October in an electoral contest that will be closely watched around Europe for the showing of the PVV.
The far-right party of Wilders is ahead in surveys but the lead over the GroenLinks-PvdA and CDA appears to be narrowing, with many voters still undecided.
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.
Inadvertent Prejudice Linked to AI Operation
The authority emphasised that the AI systems were not intentionally prejudiced, and that their “noted flaws” are a result of the manner in which AI assistants function.
