AI assistants have been shown to be “inaccurate and evidently prejudiced” when providing election recommendations, the Dutch data protection authority (AP) has reported, issuing warnings about a possible risk to democracy just eight days before national elections.
Study Shows Repeated Partiality in Chatbot Recommendations
The four chatbots evaluated by the AP “frequently recommend identical two parties”, regardless of the voter’s inquiry or input, the watchdog noted in a report published ahead of the 29 October election.
In more than half of the cases, the chatbot suggested either the far-right Freedom party (PVV) of Geert Wilders or the leftwing GroenLinks-PvdA headed by the ex-EU commissioner Frans Timmermans.
Certain groups, such as the centre-right CDA, “are rarely ever cited”, even when the user’s input precisely aligns with the stances of these political entities, the study pointed out.
Official Warns Against Using AI Chatbots for Voting Guidance
The vice-chair of the AP, the official 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 political views, 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 difficult to verify.”
Voting Background and Political Landscape
The Dutch head to the polls 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 Geert Wilders is leading the polls but the gap to the GroenLinks-PvdA and CDA seems to be closing, with many voters still undecided.
Every significant political faction have rejected a coalition with the Freedom party, meaning the runner-up party is most likely to provide the next prime minister.
Inadvertent Prejudice Linked to Chatbot Functioning
The authority stressed that the AI systems were not intentionally prejudiced, and that their “noted flaws” are a consequence of the manner in which AI assistants function.
