AI chatbots have been shown to be “inaccurate and evidently prejudiced” when offering voting advice, the Netherlands’ data watchdog has reported, raising alarms about a possible risk to democratic processes just eight days before the country’s general election.
Testing Reveals Consistent Bias in AI Suggestions
The quartet of AI assistants tested by the AP “frequently recommend identical two parties”, regardless of the voter’s inquiry or input, the watchdog explained in a report released ahead of the 29 October election.
In more than half of the cases, the chatbot suggested either the right-wing PVV of Geert Wilders or the leftwing GroenLinks-PvdA led by the ex-EU commissioner Frans Timmermans.
Certain groups, such as the moderate CDA, “are almost never mentioned”, even when the user’s input exactly matches the stances of these parties, the report indicated.
Authority Figure Cautions Against Relying on AI Assistants for Election Advice
The deputy head 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 political group that did not necessarily align with their ideological beliefs, she emphasized.
“This immediately affects a cornerstone of democracy: the honesty of open and just votes,” Verdier stated. “We thus caution against employing AI assistants for voting advice, as their operation is unclear and hard to confirm.”
Election Context and Party Dynamics
Netherlands citizens vote on October 29 in an electoral contest that will be closely watched across the continent for the performance of the PVV.
The far-right party of Wilders is ahead in surveys but the lead over 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 PVV, implying the runner-up party is most likely to supply the future head of government.
Unintentional Bias Linked to AI Operation
The authority emphasised that the bots were not deliberately biased, and that their “identified shortcomings” are a consequence of the manner in which AI assistants function.
