AI assistants have been shown to be “inaccurate and evidently prejudiced” when offering voting advice, the Dutch data protection authority (AP) has stated, issuing warnings about a possible risk to democracy just over a week before national elections.
Study Shows Consistent Bias in AI Suggestions
The four chatbots tested by the authority “frequently recommend identical two parties”, irrespective of the user’s question or command, the watchdog noted 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 former European Commission vice-president Frans Timmermans.
Certain groups, such as the centre-right CDA, “are almost never mentioned”, despite the fact that the user’s input precisely aligns with the stances of these parties, the report indicated.
Official Warns Against Using AI Chatbots for Voting Guidance
The vice-chair of the data protection agency, Monique Verdier, commented that while chatbots may seem like clever tools, “as a voting aid, they consistently fail”. Voters were being pushed toward a party that might not correspond to their political views, she added.
“This directly impacts a fundamental pillar of democracy: the honesty of open and just votes,” Verdier stated. “We thus caution against using AI chatbots for election recommendations, as their functioning is opaque and hard to confirm.”
Voting Background 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 performance of the PVV.
The right-leaning group of Wilders is ahead in surveys but the lead over the left-wing and centre-right parties appears to be narrowing, with many voters yet to make up their minds.
Every significant political faction have ruled out an alliance with the Freedom party, implying the runner-up party is most likely to provide the next prime minister.
Unintentional Bias Linked 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.
