AI assistants have been shown to be “inaccurate and evidently prejudiced” when offering voting advice, the Netherlands’ data watchdog has reported, issuing warnings about a possible risk to democratic processes just over a week before national elections.
Testing Reveals Consistent Bias in AI Suggestions
The quartet of AI assistants tested by the authority “often end up with the same two parties”, regardless of the voter’s inquiry or input, the watchdog explained in a report published ahead of the late October vote.
For over 50% of instances, the chatbot suggested either the right-wing PVV of Geert Wilders or the leftwing GroenLinks-PvdA led by the ex-EU commissioner Frans Timmermans.
Some parties, such as the centre-right CDA, “are almost never mentioned”, even when the voter’s query precisely aligns with the stances of these parties, the study indicated.
Official Warns Against Relying on AI Assistants for Election Advice
The vice-chair of the AP, the official 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 political group that might not correspond to their political views, she added.
“This directly impacts a fundamental pillar of democracy: the honesty of open and just votes,” said Verdier. “We therefore warn against using AI chatbots for voting advice, as their functioning is opaque and difficult to verify.”
Election Context and Party Dynamics
The Dutch head to the polls on October 29 in an electoral contest that will be keenly observed across the continent for the showing of the PVV.
The far-right party of Wilders is ahead in surveys but the gap to the left-wing and centre-right parties seems to be closing, with numerous electors yet to make up their minds.
All major parties have ruled out an alliance with the Freedom party, implying the runner-up party is most likely to supply the future head of government.
Unintentional Bias Attributed to Chatbot Functioning
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.
