AI assistants are proving to be “inaccurate and evidently prejudiced” when offering voting advice, the Netherlands’ data watchdog has reported, raising alarms about a potential threat to democracy just eight days before the country’s general election.
Testing Reveals Repeated Partiality in Chatbot Recommendations
The quartet of AI assistants tested by the AP “frequently recommend identical two parties”, regardless of the voter’s inquiry or input, the regulator explained in a report published ahead of the 29 October election.
In more than half of the cases, the chatbot suggested either the right-wing PVV of Geert Wilders or the progressive GroenLinks-PvdA led by the ex-EU commissioner Frans Timmermans.
Some parties, such as the centre-right CDA, “are almost never mentioned”, despite the fact that the voter’s query precisely aligns with the stances of these parties, the report indicated.
Official Warns Against Relying on AI Assistants for Election Advice
The vice-chair of the AP, Monique Verdier, stated that while AI assistants appear to be smart resources, “as a voting aid, they consistently fail”. Citizens were being steered toward a party that did not necessarily align with their political views, she emphasized.
“This directly impacts 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 performance of the Freedom party.
The far-right party of Wilders is ahead in surveys but the lead over the GroenLinks-PvdA and CDA seems to be closing, with numerous electors yet to make up their minds.
Every significant political faction have rejected a coalition with the PVV, meaning the party that comes second is highly probable to supply the future head of government.
Inadvertent Prejudice Linked to AI Operation
The authority stressed that the AI systems were not intentionally prejudiced, and that their “noted flaws” are a result of the way AI chatbots operate.
