AI assistants are proving to be “inaccurate and evidently prejudiced” when offering voting advice, the Dutch data protection authority (AP) has reported, raising alarms about a possible risk to democracy 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”, irrespective of the user’s question or command, the regulator explained in a report published ahead of the late October vote.
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 headed by the former European Commission vice-president Frans Timmermans.
Some parties, such as the centre-right CDA, “are rarely ever cited”, even when the voter’s query precisely aligns with the positions of these political entities, the study pointed out.
Official Warns Against Using AI Chatbots for Voting Guidance
The deputy head of the data protection agency, the official Monique Verdier, commented that while chatbots may seem like clever tools, “for election guidance, they repeatedly fall short”. Citizens were being steered toward a party that might not correspond to their political views, she added.
“This immediately affects a cornerstone of democracy: the integrity of free and fair elections,” Verdier stated. “We thus caution against using AI chatbots for election recommendations, as their operation is unclear and hard to confirm.”
Election Context and Party Dynamics
Netherlands citizens vote on 29 October in an election that will be closely watched across the continent for the showing of the Freedom party.
The far-right party of Wilders is leading the polls but the gap to the GroenLinks-PvdA and CDA seems to be closing, with many voters still undecided.
All major parties have ruled out an alliance with the PVV, implying the runner-up party is most likely to supply the future head of government.
Inadvertent Prejudice Attributed to Chatbot Functioning
The AP stressed that the AI systems were not intentionally prejudiced, and that their “noted flaws” are a consequence of the way AI chatbots operate.
