AI assistants are proving to be “inaccurate and evidently prejudiced” when offering voting advice, the Netherlands’ data watchdog has stated, issuing warnings about a possible risk to democracy just eight days before national elections.
Study Shows Repeated Partiality in AI Suggestions
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.
In more than half of the cases, the AI recommended either the far-right Freedom party (PVV) of Geert Wilders or the progressive GroenLinks-PvdA led by the ex-EU commissioner Frans Timmermans.
Some parties, such as the moderate CDA, “are almost never mentioned”, despite the fact that the voter’s query exactly matches the stances of these political entities, the report indicated.
Authority Figure Cautions Against Relying on AI Assistants for Election Advice
The vice-chair of the AP, the official 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 might not correspond to their ideological beliefs, she emphasized.
“This directly impacts a fundamental pillar of democracy: the integrity of free and fair elections,” said Verdier. “We therefore warn against using AI chatbots for election recommendations, as their operation is unclear and hard to confirm.”
Voting Background and Political Landscape
Netherlands citizens vote on 29 October in an election that will be closely watched across the continent for the performance of the Freedom party.
The far-right party of Wilders is ahead in surveys but the lead over the left-wing and centre-right parties appears to be narrowing, with numerous electors still undecided.
Every significant political faction have rejected a coalition with the PVV, meaning the party that comes second is highly probable to provide the next prime minister.
Unintentional Bias Linked to AI Operation
The AP stressed that the AI systems were not intentionally prejudiced, and that their “noted flaws” are a consequence of the manner in which AI assistants function.
