AI assistants are proving to be “unreliable and clearly biased” when providing election recommendations, the Netherlands’ data watchdog has reported, issuing warnings about a possible risk to democracy just eight days before the country’s general election.
Study Shows Consistent Bias in AI Suggestions
The four chatbots evaluated by the AP “often end up with the same two parties”, regardless of the voter’s inquiry or input, the regulator explained in a analysis published ahead of the 29 October election.
For over 50% of instances, the AI recommended either the far-right Freedom party (PVV) of the politician Geert Wilders or the leftwing GroenLinks-PvdA headed by the ex-EU commissioner Frans Timmermans.
Certain groups, such as the moderate CDA, “are rarely ever cited”, even when the user’s input precisely aligns with the stances of these parties, the study pointed out.
Authority Figure Cautions Against Relying on AI Assistants for Voting Guidance
The deputy head of the AP, Monique Verdier, stated that while AI assistants appear to be smart resources, “for election guidance, they repeatedly fall short”. Voters were being pushed toward a party that might not correspond to their political views, she added.
“This immediately affects a cornerstone of democracy: the honesty of open and just votes,” said Verdier. “We therefore warn against using AI chatbots for election recommendations, as their functioning is opaque and hard to confirm.”
Election Context and Party Dynamics
Netherlands citizens vote on 29 October in an electoral contest that will be closely watched around Europe for the showing of the Freedom party.
The far-right party of Geert Wilders is ahead in surveys but the gap to the left-wing and centre-right parties seems to be closing, with numerous electors still undecided.
All major parties have ruled out an alliance with the Freedom party, implying the party that comes second is highly probable to supply the future head of government.
Inadvertent Prejudice Linked to Chatbot Functioning
The authority emphasised that the AI systems were not intentionally prejudiced, and that their “identified shortcomings” are a consequence of the manner in which AI assistants function.
