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 democracy just eight days before national elections.
Study Shows Consistent Bias in AI Suggestions
The four chatbots tested by the AP “often end up with the same two parties”, regardless of the voter’s inquiry or input, the regulator noted in a report released ahead of the late October vote.
For over 50% of instances, the chatbot suggested either the far-right Freedom party (PVV) of 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”, even when the user’s input precisely aligns with the stances of these parties, the study indicated.
Authority Figure Cautions Against Relying on AI Assistants for Voting Guidance
The deputy head of the AP, the official Monique Verdier, commented that while AI assistants appear to be smart resources, “as a voting aid, they consistently fail”. Citizens were being steered toward a political group that did not necessarily align with their political views, she emphasized.
“This directly impacts a fundamental pillar of democracy: the honesty of open and just votes,” said Verdier. “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 October 29 in an election that will be keenly observed across the continent for the performance of the Freedom party.
The right-leaning group of Wilders is ahead in surveys but the gap to the left-wing and centre-right parties appears to be narrowing, with numerous electors yet to make up their minds.
All major parties have ruled out an alliance with the PVV, meaning the runner-up party is highly probable to provide the next prime minister.
Inadvertent Prejudice Attributed to AI Operation
The AP stressed that the AI systems were not intentionally prejudiced, and that their “identified shortcomings” are a result of the manner in which AI assistants function.
