AI assistants have been shown to be “unreliable and clearly biased” when providing election recommendations, the Netherlands’ data watchdog has reported, raising alarms about a possible risk to democratic processes just eight days before national elections.
Study Shows Repeated Partiality in Chatbot Recommendations
The four chatbots tested by the AP “frequently recommend identical two parties”, regardless of the user’s question or command, the watchdog noted in a report published ahead of the late October vote.
For over 50% of instances, the AI recommended either the right-wing PVV of the politician Geert Wilders or the progressive GroenLinks-PvdA led by the ex-EU commissioner Frans Timmermans.
Certain groups, such as the centre-right CDA, “are rarely ever cited”, 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 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 political group that did not necessarily align with their ideological beliefs, she added.
“This immediately affects a fundamental pillar of democracy: the honesty of open and just votes,” said Verdier. “We thus caution against using AI chatbots for election recommendations, as their operation is unclear and difficult to verify.”
Election Context and Party Dynamics
The Dutch head to the polls on October 29 in an election that will be keenly observed across the continent for the showing of the PVV.
The right-leaning group of Geert Wilders is leading the polls but the lead over the left-wing and centre-right parties appears to be narrowing, with numerous electors still undecided.
All major parties have rejected a coalition with the Freedom party, meaning the party that comes second is most likely to provide the next prime minister.
Inadvertent Prejudice Attributed to Chatbot Functioning
The authority emphasised that the AI systems were not intentionally prejudiced, and that their “noted flaws” are a result of the manner in which AI assistants function.
