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 democracy just over a week before national elections.
Testing Reveals Repeated Partiality in AI Suggestions
The four chatbots tested by the authority “often end up with the same two parties”, irrespective of the voter’s inquiry or input, the regulator noted in a report released ahead of the 29 October election.
For over 50% of instances, the chatbot suggested either the far-right Freedom party (PVV) of 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 parties, the study pointed out.
Official Warns 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, “as a voting aid, they consistently fail”. Citizens were being steered toward a political group that did not necessarily align with their ideological beliefs, she added.
“This directly impacts a fundamental pillar of democracy: the integrity of free and fair elections,” Verdier stated. “We therefore warn against using AI chatbots for voting advice, as their functioning is opaque and difficult to verify.”
Voting Background and Political Landscape
Netherlands citizens vote on October 29 in an election that will be keenly observed around Europe for the showing 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 many voters still undecided.
Every significant political faction have ruled out an alliance with the Freedom party, meaning the runner-up party is most likely to provide the next prime minister.
Inadvertent Prejudice 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.
