AI assistants have been shown to be “unreliable and clearly biased” when providing election recommendations, the Netherlands’ data watchdog has stated, issuing warnings about a potential threat to democracy just eight days before the country’s general election.
Testing Reveals Repeated Partiality in AI Suggestions
The quartet of AI assistants tested by the AP “often end up with the same two parties”, regardless of the user’s question or command, the regulator explained in a report published ahead of the 29 October election.
For over 50% of instances, the chatbot suggested either the right-wing PVV of Geert Wilders or the leftwing GroenLinks-PvdA headed by the ex-EU commissioner Frans Timmermans.
Certain groups, such as the centre-right CDA, “are almost never mentioned”, even when the voter’s query precisely aligns with the stances of these political entities, the report pointed out.
Authority Figure Cautions Against Using AI Chatbots for Election Advice
The deputy head of the AP, the official Monique Verdier, commented that while chatbots may seem like clever tools, “as a voting aid, they consistently fail”. Voters were being pushed toward a party that did not necessarily align with 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 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 election that will be keenly observed across the continent for the showing of the PVV.
The right-leaning group of Wilders is ahead in surveys but the lead over the GroenLinks-PvdA and CDA seems to be closing, with numerous electors still undecided.
Every significant political faction have rejected a coalition with the Freedom party, meaning the party that comes second is most likely to provide the next prime minister.
Unintentional Bias Linked to Chatbot Functioning
The authority emphasised that the AI systems were not intentionally prejudiced, and that their “noted flaws” are a result of the manner in which AI assistants function.
