AI chatbots are proving to be “inaccurate and evidently prejudiced” when providing election recommendations, the Netherlands’ data watchdog has stated, issuing warnings about a potential threat to democracy just over a week before national elections.
Testing Reveals Repeated Partiality in AI Suggestions
The four chatbots tested by the AP “frequently recommend identical two parties”, irrespective of the user’s question or command, the watchdog noted in a analysis published ahead of the late October vote.
In more than half of the cases, the chatbot suggested either the right-wing PVV of Geert Wilders or the progressive GroenLinks-PvdA headed by the ex-EU commissioner Frans Timmermans.
Certain groups, such as the moderate CDA, “are rarely ever cited”, even when the user’s input precisely aligns with the positions of these parties, the report indicated.
Authority Figure Cautions Against Relying on AI Assistants for Election Advice
The deputy head of the data protection agency, Monique Verdier, stated that while chatbots may seem like clever tools, “for election guidance, they repeatedly fall short”. 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 integrity of free and fair elections,” said Verdier. “We thus caution against employing AI assistants for voting advice, as their operation is unclear and hard to confirm.”
Voting Background and Party Dynamics
Netherlands citizens vote on 29 October in an election that will be keenly observed across the continent for the showing of the PVV.
The far-right party of Wilders is leading the polls but the gap to the GroenLinks-PvdA and CDA seems to be closing, with numerous electors still undecided.
All major parties have ruled out an alliance with the PVV, implying the party that comes second is most likely to supply the future head of government.
Inadvertent Prejudice Attributed to AI Operation
The AP 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.
