AI chatbots have been shown to be “inaccurate and evidently prejudiced” when offering voting advice, the Dutch data protection authority (AP) has stated, issuing warnings about a potential threat to democracy just eight days before the country’s general election.
Study Shows Consistent Bias in AI Suggestions
The four chatbots tested by the AP “frequently recommend identical two parties”, irrespective of the voter’s inquiry or input, the regulator noted in a report 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 led by the ex-EU commissioner 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 study pointed out.
Official Warns Against Using AI Chatbots for Voting Guidance
The vice-chair of the AP, 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 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 operation is unclear and hard to confirm.”
Voting Background and Party Dynamics
Netherlands citizens vote on 29 October in an electoral contest that will be closely watched around Europe for the performance of the Freedom party.
The right-leaning group of Geert Wilders is leading the polls but the lead over the GroenLinks-PvdA and CDA appears to be narrowing, with numerous electors still undecided.
Every significant political faction have rejected a coalition with the PVV, implying the runner-up party is highly probable to supply the future head of government.
Inadvertent Prejudice Attributed to Chatbot Functioning
The authority stressed that the bots were not deliberately biased, and that their “identified shortcomings” are a result of the manner in which AI assistants function.
