AI chatbots have been shown to be “unreliable and clearly biased” when providing election recommendations, the Dutch data protection authority (AP) has stated, issuing warnings about a potential threat to democracy just eight days before the country’s general election.
Study Shows Repeated Partiality in Chatbot Recommendations
The four chatbots tested by the authority “frequently recommend identical two parties”, regardless of the voter’s inquiry or input, the watchdog noted in a analysis published ahead of the late October vote.
For over 50% of instances, the chatbot suggested either the right-wing PVV of the politician Geert Wilders or the leftwing GroenLinks-PvdA headed by the former European Commission vice-president Frans Timmermans.
Some parties, such as the moderate CDA, “are almost never mentioned”, even when the user’s input exactly matches the stances of these political entities, the report pointed out.
Official Warns Against Using AI Chatbots for Voting Guidance
The deputy head of the AP, Monique Verdier, stated that while chatbots may seem like clever tools, “as a voting aid, they consistently fail”. Voters were being pushed toward a party that might not correspond to their political views, she emphasized.
“This immediately affects a cornerstone of democracy: the integrity of free and fair elections,” said Verdier. “We thus caution against employing AI assistants for voting advice, as their functioning is opaque and hard to confirm.”
Voting Background and Party Dynamics
Netherlands citizens vote on 29 October in an election that will be keenly observed across the continent for the performance of the PVV.
The right-leaning group 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 Freedom party, meaning the party that comes second is most likely to supply the future head of government.
Unintentional Bias Linked to Chatbot Functioning
The authority emphasised that the bots were not deliberately biased, and that their “noted flaws” are a result of the way AI chatbots operate.
