AI chatbots are proving to be “inaccurate and evidently prejudiced” when providing election recommendations, the Netherlands’ data watchdog has stated, raising alarms about a possible risk to democracy just over a week before the country’s general election.
Testing Reveals Repeated Partiality in AI Suggestions
The four chatbots evaluated by the authority “often end up with the same two parties”, regardless of the user’s question or command, the regulator noted in a analysis released ahead of the 29 October election.
In more than half of the cases, 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.
Some parties, such as the moderate CDA, “are almost never mentioned”, even when the voter’s query precisely aligns with the positions of these political entities, the report pointed out.
Official Warns Against Using AI Chatbots for Election Advice
The vice-chair of the AP, Monique Verdier, stated that while AI assistants appear to be smart resources, “for election guidance, they repeatedly fall short”. Citizens were being steered toward a party that did not necessarily align with their ideological beliefs, she added.
“This directly impacts a cornerstone of democracy: the integrity of free and fair elections,” said Verdier. “We therefore warn against using AI chatbots for voting advice, as their functioning is opaque and difficult to verify.”
Voting Background and Political Landscape
Netherlands citizens vote on 29 October in an election that will be keenly observed across the continent for the showing of the Freedom party.
The right-leaning group of Geert Wilders is leading the polls but the lead over the GroenLinks-PvdA and CDA seems to be closing, with many voters still undecided.
Every significant political faction have ruled out an alliance with the PVV, implying the party that comes second is most likely to supply the future head of government.
Unintentional Bias Linked to AI Operation
The authority stressed that the bots were not deliberately biased, and that their “noted flaws” are a consequence of the way AI chatbots operate.
