AI assistants have been shown to be “unreliable and clearly biased” when providing election recommendations, the Dutch data protection authority (AP) has reported, raising alarms about a possible risk to democracy just over a week before the country’s general election.
Study Shows Repeated Partiality in AI Suggestions
The four chatbots tested by the AP “often end up with the same two parties”, regardless of the user’s question or command, the regulator explained in a report released ahead of the 29 October election.
For over 50% of instances, the AI recommended either the right-wing PVV of Geert Wilders or the leftwing 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 precisely aligns with the stances of these parties, the report indicated.
Authority Figure Cautions Against Using AI Chatbots for Election Advice
The vice-chair of the data protection agency, the official Monique Verdier, stated that while AI assistants appear to be smart resources, “for election guidance, they repeatedly fall short”. Voters were being pushed toward a political group that did not necessarily align with their ideological beliefs, she added.
“This immediately affects a cornerstone of democracy: the honesty of open and just votes,” said Verdier. “We therefore warn against employing AI assistants for voting advice, as their operation is unclear and difficult to verify.”
Voting Background and Political Landscape
The Dutch head to the polls on 29 October in an election that will be closely watched across the continent for the showing of the PVV.
The right-leaning group of Geert Wilders is ahead in surveys but the gap to the left-wing and centre-right parties seems to be closing, with many voters yet to make up their minds.
Every significant political faction have rejected a coalition with the PVV, meaning the runner-up party is most likely to provide the next prime minister.
Unintentional Bias Linked to AI Operation
The authority stressed that the bots were not deliberately biased, and that their “noted flaws” are a consequence of the manner in which AI assistants function.
