AI chatbots have been shown to be “inaccurate and evidently prejudiced” when offering voting advice, the Dutch data protection authority (AP) has stated, raising alarms about a possible risk to democratic processes just eight days before the country’s general election.
Study Shows Consistent Bias in AI Suggestions
The quartet of AI assistants tested by the AP “frequently recommend identical two parties”, irrespective of the user’s question or command, the watchdog noted in a report published ahead of the late October vote.
For over 50% of instances, the AI recommended either the right-wing PVV of the politician Geert Wilders or the leftwing GroenLinks-PvdA headed by the former European Commission vice-president Frans Timmermans.
Certain groups, such as the moderate CDA, “are rarely ever cited”, despite the fact that the voter’s query exactly matches the positions of these political entities, the report 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 party that did not necessarily align with their political views, she emphasized.
“This immediately affects a cornerstone of democracy: the integrity of free and fair elections,” said Verdier. “We thus caution against employing AI assistants for election recommendations, as their functioning is opaque and hard to confirm.”
Election Context and Political Landscape
The Dutch head to the polls on 29 October in an electoral contest that will be closely watched around Europe for the showing of the PVV.
The far-right party of Wilders is leading the polls but the gap to the left-wing and centre-right parties appears to be narrowing, 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 AI Operation
The authority stressed that the AI systems were not intentionally prejudiced, and that their “noted flaws” are a result of the way AI chatbots operate.
