AI assistants are proving to be “inaccurate and evidently prejudiced” when offering voting advice, the Netherlands’ data watchdog has reported, issuing warnings about a potential threat to democratic processes just over a week before national elections.
Testing Reveals Repeated Partiality in AI Suggestions
The quartet of AI assistants tested by the authority “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 chatbot suggested either the right-wing PVV of Geert Wilders or the leftwing GroenLinks-PvdA led by the ex-EU commissioner Frans Timmermans.
Certain groups, such as the centre-right CDA, “are almost never mentioned”, even when the user’s input exactly matches the positions of these political entities, the study pointed out.
Authority Figure Cautions Against Relying on AI Assistants for Election Advice
The deputy head of the AP, 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 party that might not correspond to their ideological beliefs, she emphasized.
“This directly impacts a fundamental pillar of democracy: the honesty of open and just votes,” said Verdier. “We thus caution against using AI chatbots for voting advice, as their operation is unclear and hard to confirm.”
Election Context and Political Landscape
Netherlands citizens vote on 29 October in an electoral contest 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 GroenLinks-PvdA and CDA seems to be closing, with numerous electors still undecided.
Every significant political faction have rejected a coalition with the PVV, implying the runner-up party is highly probable 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.
