AI chatbots are proving to be “inaccurate and evidently prejudiced” when providing election recommendations, the Dutch data protection authority (AP) has reported, raising alarms about a potential threat to democratic processes just eight days before the country’s general election.
Study Shows Consistent Bias in Chatbot Recommendations
The four chatbots tested by the AP “often end up with the same two parties”, regardless of the user’s question or command, the watchdog noted in a report released ahead of the 29 October election.
For over 50% of instances, the AI recommended either the right-wing PVV of the politician Geert Wilders or the progressive GroenLinks-PvdA headed 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 political entities, the report pointed out.
Official Warns Against Using AI Chatbots 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 political views, she added.
“This directly impacts a cornerstone of democracy: the honesty of open and just votes,” said Verdier. “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 electoral contest that will be keenly observed around Europe for the performance of the PVV.
The right-leaning group of Geert Wilders is ahead in surveys but the lead over the left-wing and centre-right parties seems to be closing, with many voters still undecided.
Every significant political faction have rejected a coalition with the PVV, implying the runner-up party is most likely to supply the future head of government.
Unintentional Bias Linked to AI Operation
The AP emphasised that the bots were not deliberately biased, and that their “noted flaws” are a consequence of the manner in which AI assistants function.
