AI chatbots are proving to be “inaccurate and evidently prejudiced” when providing election recommendations, the Dutch data protection authority (AP) has stated, raising alarms about a potential threat to democratic processes just eight days before the country’s general election.
Study Shows Consistent Bias in AI Suggestions
The quartet of AI assistants evaluated by the AP “often end up with the same two parties”, regardless of the user’s question or command, the watchdog 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 Geert Wilders or the leftwing GroenLinks-PvdA led by the ex-EU commissioner Frans Timmermans.
Some parties, such as the moderate CDA, “are almost never mentioned”, even when the user’s input precisely aligns with the stances of these parties, the study pointed out.
Official Warns Against Relying on AI Assistants for Election Advice
The deputy head of the AP, Monique Verdier, commented that while chatbots may seem like clever tools, “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 honesty of open and just votes,” Verdier stated. “We therefore warn against using AI chatbots for voting advice, as their operation is unclear and hard to confirm.”
Voting Background and Political Landscape
Netherlands citizens vote on 29 October in an election that will be keenly observed 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 numerous electors yet to make up their minds.
All major parties have rejected a coalition with the PVV, implying the runner-up party is most likely to provide the next prime minister.
Inadvertent Prejudice Linked to AI Operation
The authority stressed that the bots were not deliberately biased, and that their “noted flaws” are a consequence of the manner in which AI assistants function.
