AI chatbots have been shown to be “unreliable and clearly biased” when providing election recommendations, the Netherlands’ data watchdog has stated, raising alarms about a possible risk to democratic processes just eight days before national elections.
Study Shows Repeated Partiality in AI Suggestions
The four chatbots tested by the AP “frequently recommend identical two parties”, regardless of the voter’s inquiry or input, the regulator noted in a analysis released ahead of the late October vote.
For over 50% of instances, the chatbot suggested either the right-wing PVV of the politician Geert Wilders or the leftwing GroenLinks-PvdA led by the ex-EU commissioner Frans Timmermans.
Some parties, such as the moderate CDA, “are rarely ever cited”, even when the voter’s query exactly matches the positions of these parties, the study indicated.
Authority Figure Cautions Against Using AI Chatbots for Election Advice
The vice-chair of the data protection agency, 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 party that did not necessarily align with their political views, she emphasized.
“This immediately affects a cornerstone of democracy: the honesty of open and just votes,” Verdier stated. “We therefore warn against employing AI assistants for voting advice, as their functioning is opaque and difficult to verify.”
Voting Background and Party Dynamics
The Dutch head to the polls on 29 October 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 ahead in surveys but the lead over the GroenLinks-PvdA and CDA seems to be closing, with numerous electors yet to make up their minds.
All major parties have rejected a coalition with the PVV, implying the party that comes second is highly probable to supply the future head of government.
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.
