AI assistants have been shown to be “inaccurate and evidently prejudiced” when offering voting advice, the Dutch data protection authority (AP) has stated, issuing warnings about a possible risk to democracy just over a week before national elections.
Testing Reveals Consistent Bias in AI Suggestions
The four chatbots evaluated by the AP “frequently recommend identical two parties”, regardless of the voter’s inquiry or input, the regulator explained in a analysis published ahead of the 29 October election.
For over 50% of instances, the chatbot suggested either the far-right Freedom party (PVV) of Geert Wilders or the progressive GroenLinks-PvdA headed by the ex-EU commissioner Frans Timmermans.
Some parties, such as the moderate CDA, “are rarely ever cited”, even when the user’s input exactly matches the positions of these parties, the study indicated.
Official Warns Against Using AI Chatbots for Voting Guidance
The deputy head 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 emphasized.
“This directly impacts a cornerstone of democracy: the honesty of open and just votes,” Verdier stated. “We therefore warn against employing AI assistants for election recommendations, as their operation is unclear and difficult to verify.”
Election Context and Political Landscape
The Dutch head to the polls on 29 October in an electoral contest that will be keenly observed across the continent for the showing 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.
All major parties have ruled out an alliance with the Freedom party, meaning the runner-up party is most likely to supply the future head of government.
Unintentional Bias Attributed to AI Operation
The authority stressed that the AI systems were not intentionally prejudiced, and that their “identified shortcomings” are a consequence of the manner in which AI assistants function.
