AI chatbots have been shown to be “unreliable and clearly biased” when offering voting advice, the Netherlands’ data watchdog has stated, issuing warnings about a potential threat 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 “often end up with the same two parties”, irrespective of the voter’s inquiry or input, the watchdog noted in a report released ahead of the 29 October election.
For over 50% of instances, 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 moderate CDA, “are rarely ever cited”, despite the fact that the user’s input exactly matches the positions of these parties, the report pointed out.
Authority Figure Cautions Against Using AI Chatbots for Election Advice
The vice-chair of the data protection agency, the official Monique Verdier, commented that while chatbots may seem like clever tools, “for election guidance, they repeatedly fall short”. Citizens were being steered toward a party that might not correspond to their political views, she added.
“This immediately affects a cornerstone of democracy: the integrity of free and fair elections,” said Verdier. “We therefore warn against using AI chatbots for election recommendations, as their functioning is opaque and difficult to verify.”
Election Context and Party Dynamics
The Dutch head to the polls on October 29 in an election that will be closely watched around Europe for the performance of the PVV.
The far-right party of Geert Wilders is ahead in surveys but the lead over the left-wing and centre-right parties 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 most likely to supply the future head of government.
Inadvertent Prejudice Linked to Chatbot Functioning
The AP stressed that the bots were not deliberately biased, and that their “noted flaws” are a result of the manner in which AI assistants function.
