AI assistants are proving to be “inaccurate and evidently prejudiced” when providing election recommendations, the Dutch data protection authority (AP) has reported, issuing warnings about a potential threat to democracy just over a week before national elections.
Study Shows 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 regulator explained in a analysis released ahead of the 29 October election.
In more than half of the cases, the chatbot suggested either the far-right Freedom party (PVV) of the politician Geert Wilders or the leftwing GroenLinks-PvdA headed by the ex-EU commissioner Frans Timmermans.
Some parties, such as the centre-right CDA, “are rarely ever cited”, even when the user’s input precisely aligns with the positions of these parties, the study pointed out.
Authority Figure Cautions Against Relying on AI Assistants for Election Advice
The deputy head of the AP, the official Monique Verdier, commented that while chatbots may seem like clever tools, “for election guidance, they repeatedly fall short”. Citizens were being steered toward a party that might not correspond to their ideological beliefs, she added.
“This immediately affects a cornerstone of democracy: the honesty of open and just votes,” Verdier stated. “We thus caution against employing AI assistants for voting advice, 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 around Europe for the performance of the PVV.
The far-right party of Geert Wilders is leading the polls but the gap to the GroenLinks-PvdA and CDA appears to be narrowing, with many voters still undecided.
All major parties have rejected a coalition with the PVV, implying the party that comes second is most likely to provide the next prime minister.
Unintentional Bias Attributed to Chatbot Functioning
The authority stressed that the AI systems were not intentionally prejudiced, and that their “identified shortcomings” are a consequence of the way AI chatbots operate.
