AI chatbots are proving to be “inaccurate and evidently prejudiced” when providing election recommendations, the Dutch data protection authority (AP) has stated, issuing warnings about a potential threat to democracy just over a week before the country’s general election.
Study Shows Repeated Partiality in AI Suggestions
The four chatbots tested by the AP “often end up with the same two parties”, irrespective of the user’s question or command, the regulator explained in a analysis released ahead of the 29 October election.
In more than half of the cases, the chatbot suggested either the far-right Freedom party (PVV) of the politician Geert Wilders or the progressive 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 parties, the study indicated.
Official Warns Against Using AI Chatbots for Voting Guidance
The vice-chair of the AP, 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 added.
“This immediately affects a fundamental pillar of democracy: the integrity of free and fair elections,” 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
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 ahead in surveys but the lead over the left-wing and centre-right parties appears to be narrowing, with many voters still undecided.
All major parties have ruled out an alliance with the Freedom party, meaning the party that comes second is most likely to supply the future head of government.
Unintentional Bias 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.
