AI chatbots have been shown to be “unreliable and clearly biased” when providing election recommendations, the Dutch data protection authority (AP) has stated, issuing warnings about a possible risk to democracy just over a week before the country’s general election.
Study Shows Consistent Bias in AI Suggestions
The four chatbots evaluated by the authority “often end up with the same two parties”, irrespective of the voter’s inquiry or input, the regulator noted in a analysis released ahead of the late October vote.
In more than half of the cases, the AI recommended either the far-right Freedom party (PVV) of the politician Geert Wilders or the progressive GroenLinks-PvdA headed by the former European Commission vice-president Frans Timmermans.
Some parties, such as the centre-right CDA, “are almost never mentioned”, even when the user’s input precisely aligns with the positions of these political entities, the report indicated.
Authority Figure Cautions Against Relying on AI Assistants for Voting Guidance
The deputy head of the data protection agency, Monique Verdier, commented that while chatbots may seem like clever tools, “for election guidance, they repeatedly fall short”. Voters were being pushed toward a political group that did not necessarily align with their ideological beliefs, she added.
“This immediately affects a fundamental pillar of democracy: the integrity of free and fair elections,” Verdier stated. “We thus caution against using AI chatbots for election recommendations, as their operation is unclear and hard to confirm.”
Election Context and Party Dynamics
Netherlands citizens vote on 29 October in an election that will be keenly observed across the continent for the performance 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 many voters yet to make up their minds.
All major parties have ruled out an alliance with the PVV, implying the party that comes second is highly probable to provide the next prime minister.
Inadvertent Prejudice Linked to AI Operation
The authority emphasised that the AI systems were not intentionally prejudiced, and that their “noted flaws” are a consequence of the manner in which AI assistants function.
