AI chatbots are proving to be “unreliable and clearly biased” when offering voting advice, the Dutch data protection authority (AP) has reported, issuing warnings about a possible risk to democratic processes just eight days before national elections.
Study Shows Consistent Bias in AI Suggestions
The quartet of AI assistants tested by the authority “often end up with the same two parties”, irrespective of the voter’s inquiry or input, the watchdog explained in a report released ahead of the 29 October election.
For over 50% of instances, the chatbot suggested either the far-right Freedom party (PVV) of Geert Wilders or the progressive GroenLinks-PvdA led by the ex-EU commissioner Frans Timmermans.
Some parties, such as the moderate CDA, “are almost never mentioned”, even when the voter’s query exactly matches the positions of these political entities, the study pointed out.
Official Warns 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, “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 thus caution against using AI chatbots 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 closely watched around Europe for the showing of the Freedom party.
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 still undecided.
All major parties have rejected a coalition with the PVV, implying the party that comes second is highly probable to supply the future head of government.
Unintentional Bias Attributed to Chatbot Functioning
The AP emphasised that the AI systems were not intentionally prejudiced, and that their “noted flaws” are a consequence of the way AI chatbots operate.
