AI chatbots are proving to be “inaccurate and evidently prejudiced” when offering voting advice, the Netherlands’ data watchdog has reported, raising alarms about a possible risk to democracy just over a week before national elections.
Study Shows Repeated Partiality in AI Suggestions
The quartet of AI assistants evaluated by the authority “often end up with the same two parties”, regardless of the voter’s inquiry or input, the regulator explained in a analysis released ahead of the 29 October election.
In more than half of the cases, the chatbot suggested either the far-right Freedom party (PVV) of the politician Geert Wilders or the progressive GroenLinks-PvdA led by the ex-EU commissioner Frans Timmermans.
Some parties, such as the moderate CDA, “are rarely ever cited”, even when the user’s input precisely aligns with the positions of these parties, the study pointed out.
Official Warns Against Relying on AI Assistants for Voting Guidance
The vice-chair of the AP, Monique Verdier, commented that while AI assistants appear to be smart resources, “for election guidance, they repeatedly fall short”. Citizens were being steered toward a political group that might not correspond to their political views, she added.
“This directly impacts a fundamental pillar of democracy: the integrity of free and fair elections,” Verdier stated. “We thus caution against employing AI assistants for election recommendations, as their functioning is opaque and difficult to verify.”
Voting Background and Political Landscape
The Dutch head to the polls on 29 October in an electoral contest that will be closely watched across the continent for the performance of the Freedom party.
The far-right party of Wilders is leading the polls but the gap to the GroenLinks-PvdA and CDA seems to be closing, with numerous electors still undecided.
All major parties have rejected a coalition with the Freedom party, implying the party that comes second is highly probable to provide the next prime minister.
Inadvertent Prejudice Linked to AI Operation
The authority stressed that the AI systems were not intentionally prejudiced, and that their “noted flaws” are a result of the manner in which AI assistants function.
