AI assistants are proving to be “unreliable and clearly biased” when providing election recommendations, the Dutch data protection authority (AP) has reported, 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 tested by the authority “frequently recommend identical two parties”, irrespective of the voter’s inquiry or input, the watchdog explained in a report released ahead of the late October vote.
For over 50% of instances, the chatbot suggested either the right-wing PVV of the politician Geert Wilders or the progressive GroenLinks-PvdA led by the ex-EU commissioner Frans Timmermans.
Certain groups, such as the moderate CDA, “are rarely ever cited”, even when the user’s input exactly matches the positions of these political entities, the study indicated.
Official Warns Against Using AI Chatbots for Voting Guidance
The deputy head of the data protection agency, Monique Verdier, commented that while chatbots may seem like clever tools, “for election guidance, they repeatedly fall short”. Voters were being pushed toward a political group that did not necessarily align with their ideological beliefs, she added.
“This immediately affects a cornerstone of democracy: the integrity of free and fair elections,” Verdier stated. “We thus caution against using AI chatbots for voting advice, as their operation is unclear and hard to confirm.”
Election Context and Party Dynamics
The Dutch head to the polls on October 29 in an election that will be keenly observed around Europe for the performance of the Freedom party.
The right-leaning group of Wilders is ahead in surveys but the gap to the GroenLinks-PvdA and CDA seems to be closing, with many voters yet to make up their minds.
Every significant political faction have rejected a coalition with the PVV, meaning the runner-up party is highly probable to supply the future head of government.
Inadvertent Prejudice Attributed to AI Operation
The authority emphasised that the bots were not deliberately biased, and that their “identified shortcomings” are a result of the manner in which AI assistants function.
