AI chatbots have been shown to be “unreliable and clearly biased” when offering voting advice, the Netherlands’ data watchdog has stated, raising alarms about a potential threat to democracy just over a week before the country’s general election.
Testing Reveals Repeated Partiality in Chatbot Recommendations
The four chatbots tested by the AP “often end up with the same two parties”, irrespective of the voter’s inquiry or input, the regulator explained in a report published 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 leftwing GroenLinks-PvdA headed by the ex-EU commissioner Frans Timmermans.
Certain groups, such as the moderate CDA, “are almost never mentioned”, even when the voter’s query precisely aligns with the stances of these political entities, the report indicated.
Official Warns Against Using AI Chatbots for Voting Guidance
The deputy head of the data protection agency, Monique Verdier, stated 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 did not necessarily align with their political views, she added.
“This immediately affects a cornerstone of democracy: the integrity of free and fair elections,” said Verdier. “We therefore warn against employing AI assistants for voting advice, as their functioning is opaque and difficult to verify.”
Voting Background and Party Dynamics
Netherlands citizens vote on 29 October in an electoral contest that will be keenly observed across the continent for the performance of the PVV.
The far-right party of Wilders is ahead in surveys but the gap to the left-wing and centre-right parties seems to be closing, with numerous electors still undecided.
All major parties have rejected a coalition with the PVV, implying the runner-up party is highly probable to supply the future head of government.
Inadvertent Prejudice Linked to AI Operation
The AP emphasised that the AI systems were not intentionally prejudiced, and that their “noted flaws” are a consequence of the way AI chatbots operate.
