AI assistants have been shown to be “inaccurate and evidently prejudiced” when offering voting advice, the Dutch data protection authority (AP) has reported, issuing warnings about a potential threat to democratic processes just over a week before national elections.
Study Shows Consistent Bias in AI Suggestions
The quartet of AI assistants tested by the AP “often end up with the same two parties”, irrespective of the voter’s inquiry or input, the regulator explained in a report published ahead of the 29 October election.
For over 50% of instances, the chatbot suggested either the right-wing 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”, even when the voter’s query exactly matches the positions of these political entities, the study pointed out.
Official Warns Against Using AI Chatbots for Election Advice
The deputy head of the data protection agency, the official Monique Verdier, commented that while chatbots may seem like clever tools, “as a voting aid, they consistently fail”. Voters were being pushed toward a political group that did not necessarily align with their political views, she emphasized.
“This immediately affects a fundamental pillar of democracy: the honesty of open and just votes,” Verdier stated. “We thus caution against using AI chatbots for election recommendations, as their operation is unclear and difficult to verify.”
Election Context and Party Dynamics
The Dutch head to the polls on October 29 in an election that will be closely watched around Europe for the performance of the PVV.
The right-leaning group of Wilders is leading the polls but the lead over the GroenLinks-PvdA and CDA appears to be narrowing, with numerous electors yet to make up their minds.
All major parties have ruled out an alliance with the PVV, implying the party that comes second is most likely to provide the next prime minister.
Unintentional Bias Attributed to AI Operation
The AP 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.
