AI chatbots have been shown to be “inaccurate and evidently prejudiced” when offering voting advice, the Dutch data protection authority (AP) has stated, issuing warnings about a potential threat to democratic processes just eight days before the country’s general election.
Study Shows Repeated Partiality in Chatbot Recommendations
The four chatbots tested by the authority “frequently recommend identical two parties”, regardless of the user’s question or command, the regulator explained in a analysis published 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 leftwing GroenLinks-PvdA headed by the former European Commission vice-president Frans Timmermans.
Certain groups, such as the centre-right CDA, “are rarely ever cited”, despite the fact that the user’s input exactly matches the positions of these political entities, the report pointed out.
Official Warns Against Using AI Chatbots for Election Advice
The vice-chair of the data protection agency, Monique Verdier, stated that while chatbots may seem like clever tools, “for election guidance, they repeatedly fall short”. Voters were being pushed toward a party that might not correspond to their ideological beliefs, she emphasized.
“This directly impacts a cornerstone of democracy: the honesty of open and just votes,” Verdier stated. “We therefore warn against using AI chatbots for election recommendations, as their functioning is opaque and hard to confirm.”
Voting Background and Party Dynamics
Netherlands citizens vote on 29 October in an election that will be closely watched across the continent for the showing of the PVV.
The far-right party of Wilders is leading the polls but the lead over the left-wing and centre-right parties seems to be closing, with many voters still undecided.
All major parties have ruled out an alliance with the PVV, meaning the runner-up party is most likely to supply the future head of government.
Unintentional Bias Linked to AI Operation
The AP stressed that the AI systems were not intentionally prejudiced, and that their “noted flaws” are a result of the manner in which AI assistants function.
