AI assistants have been shown to be “unreliable and clearly biased” when offering voting advice, the Netherlands’ data watchdog has reported, issuing warnings about a possible risk to democratic processes just eight days before the country’s general election.
Study Shows Repeated Partiality in AI Suggestions
The four chatbots evaluated by the authority “often end up with the same two parties”, irrespective of the user’s question or command, the regulator 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 Geert Wilders or the progressive GroenLinks-PvdA led by the ex-EU commissioner Frans Timmermans.
Certain groups, such as the centre-right CDA, “are rarely ever cited”, even when the voter’s query exactly matches the positions of these parties, the study pointed out.
Authority Figure Cautions Against Using AI Chatbots for Voting Guidance
The vice-chair of the data protection agency, Monique Verdier, commented that while chatbots may seem like clever tools, “as a voting aid, they consistently fail”. Citizens were being steered toward a political group that did not necessarily align with their political views, she added.
“This directly impacts a cornerstone of democracy: the honesty of open and just votes,” said Verdier. “We thus caution against using AI chatbots for voting advice, as their operation is unclear and hard to confirm.”
Election Context and Party Dynamics
Netherlands citizens vote on October 29 in an election that will be closely watched across the continent for the performance of the Freedom party.
The far-right party of Geert Wilders is ahead in surveys but the lead over the left-wing and centre-right parties appears to be narrowing, with many voters yet to make up their minds.
All major parties have rejected a coalition with the Freedom party, implying the runner-up party is most likely to provide the next prime minister.
Unintentional Bias Attributed to AI Operation
The authority emphasised that the AI systems were not intentionally prejudiced, and that their “identified shortcomings” are a consequence of the manner in which AI assistants function.