AI assistants are proving to be “unreliable and clearly biased” when providing election recommendations, the Netherlands’ data watchdog has stated, raising alarms about a possible risk to democracy just over a week before the country’s general election.
Study Shows Repeated Partiality in AI Suggestions
The quartet of AI assistants evaluated by the AP “frequently recommend identical two parties”, irrespective of the voter’s inquiry or input, the regulator noted in a analysis released 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 ex-EU commissioner Frans Timmermans.
Some parties, such as the centre-right CDA, “are almost never mentioned”, even when the user’s input precisely aligns with the positions of these parties, the study indicated.
Official Warns Against Using AI Chatbots for Election Advice
The deputy head of the AP, Monique Verdier, commented that while AI assistants appear to be smart resources, “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 cornerstone of democracy: the integrity of free and fair elections,” Verdier stated. “We therefore warn 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 29 October in an electoral contest that will be keenly observed around Europe for the showing of the PVV.
The right-leaning group of Wilders is leading the polls but the gap to the left-wing and centre-right parties seems to be closing, with numerous electors yet to make up their minds.
All major parties have ruled out an alliance with the Freedom party, implying the runner-up party is most likely to supply the future head of government.
Unintentional Bias Attributed to Chatbot Functioning
The authority stressed that the AI systems were not intentionally prejudiced, and that their “noted flaws” are a result of the manner in which AI assistants function.
