AI chatbots have been shown to be “unreliable and clearly biased” when offering voting advice, the Dutch data protection authority (AP) has stated, raising alarms about a possible risk to democratic processes just eight days before the country’s general election.
Testing Reveals Consistent Bias in AI Suggestions
The four chatbots tested by the authority “frequently recommend identical two parties”, irrespective of the user’s question or command, the watchdog noted in a report published ahead of the 29 October election.
In more than half of the cases, the AI recommended either the far-right Freedom party (PVV) of Geert Wilders or the leftwing GroenLinks-PvdA led by the former European Commission vice-president Frans Timmermans.
Some parties, such as the moderate CDA, “are rarely ever cited”, despite the fact that the user’s input exactly matches the positions of these political entities, the report indicated.
Authority Figure Cautions Against Relying on AI Assistants for Election Advice
The vice-chair of the AP, Monique Verdier, stated that while AI assistants appear to be smart resources, “as a voting aid, they consistently fail”. Citizens were being steered toward a party that did not necessarily align with their ideological beliefs, she emphasized.
“This directly impacts a fundamental pillar of democracy: the honesty of open and just votes,” said Verdier. “We therefore warn against employing AI assistants for voting advice, as their functioning is opaque and difficult to verify.”
Voting Background and Party Dynamics
The Dutch head to the polls on 29 October in an election that will be closely watched around Europe for the showing of the PVV.
The right-leaning group of Geert Wilders is leading the polls but the lead over the left-wing and centre-right parties appears to be narrowing, with numerous electors still undecided.
All major parties have rejected a coalition with the PVV, meaning the runner-up party is most likely to supply the future head of government.
Unintentional Bias Attributed to AI Operation
The AP stressed that the bots were not deliberately biased, and that their “noted flaws” are a consequence of the manner in which AI assistants function.
