AI chatbots have been shown to be “unreliable and clearly biased” when offering voting advice, the Dutch data protection authority (AP) has stated, raising alarms about a possible risk to democracy just eight days before the country’s general election.
Testing Reveals Repeated Partiality in AI Suggestions
The four chatbots evaluated by the authority “frequently recommend identical two parties”, irrespective of the voter’s inquiry or input, the regulator noted in a analysis released ahead of the late October vote.
In more than half of the cases, the AI recommended either the right-wing 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 exactly matches the stances of these parties, the report pointed out.
Official Warns Against Using AI Chatbots for Election Advice
The vice-chair of the AP, the official Monique Verdier, commented that while AI assistants appear to be smart resources, “for election guidance, they repeatedly fall short”. Voters were being pushed toward a party that might not correspond to their ideological beliefs, she added.
“This directly impacts a cornerstone of democracy: the honesty of open and just votes,” said Verdier. “We therefore warn against using AI chatbots for election recommendations, as their functioning is opaque and difficult to verify.”
Voting Background and Party Dynamics
The Dutch head to the polls on October 29 in an election that will be keenly observed around Europe for the performance of the Freedom party.
The far-right party of Wilders is ahead in surveys but the gap to the left-wing and centre-right parties appears to be narrowing, with many voters 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.
Inadvertent Prejudice Linked to Chatbot Functioning
The AP stressed that the bots were not deliberately biased, and that their “noted flaws” are a consequence of the manner in which AI assistants function.
