AI chatbots have been shown to be “unreliable and clearly biased” when offering voting advice, the Dutch data protection authority (AP) has stated, issuing warnings about a potential threat to democracy just eight days before the country’s general election.
Testing Reveals Repeated Partiality in AI Suggestions
The quartet of AI assistants tested by the AP “often end up with the same two parties”, irrespective of the user’s question or command, the watchdog 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 leftwing GroenLinks-PvdA headed by the former European Commission vice-president Frans Timmermans.
Some parties, such as the centre-right CDA, “are almost never mentioned”, despite the fact that the voter’s query exactly matches the stances of these political entities, the study indicated.
Official Warns Against Relying on AI Assistants for Election Advice
The vice-chair of the data protection agency, the official Monique Verdier, stated that while AI assistants appear to be smart resources, “for election guidance, they repeatedly fall short”. Citizens were being steered toward a party that might not correspond to their political views, she emphasized.
“This directly impacts a cornerstone of democracy: the integrity of free and fair elections,” Verdier stated. “We thus caution against employing AI assistants for voting advice, as their functioning is opaque and hard to confirm.”
Voting Background and Party Dynamics
Netherlands citizens vote on 29 October in an election that will be closely watched across the continent for the showing of the PVV.
The right-leaning group of Wilders is ahead in surveys but the gap to the GroenLinks-PvdA and CDA seems to be closing, with many voters still undecided.
Every significant political faction have ruled out an alliance with the PVV, implying the runner-up party is highly probable to provide the next prime minister.
Unintentional Bias Attributed to AI Operation
The authority emphasised that the AI systems were not intentionally prejudiced, and that their “noted flaws” are a result of the way AI chatbots operate.
