AI assistants have been shown to be “unreliable and clearly biased” when providing election recommendations, the Netherlands’ data watchdog has reported, raising alarms about a possible risk to democratic processes just over a week before the country’s general election.
Study Shows Repeated Partiality in AI Suggestions
The quartet of AI assistants tested 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.
In more than half of the cases, the AI recommended either the right-wing PVV of the politician Geert Wilders or the progressive GroenLinks-PvdA led by the ex-EU commissioner Frans Timmermans.
Some parties, such as the moderate CDA, “are almost never mentioned”, even when the user’s input precisely aligns with the positions of these parties, the study indicated.
Official Warns Against Using AI Chatbots for Election Advice
The vice-chair of the AP, Monique Verdier, stated that while AI assistants appear to be smart resources, “as a voting aid, they consistently fail”. Citizens were being steered toward a political group that did not necessarily align with their political views, she emphasized.
“This directly impacts a fundamental pillar of democracy: the honesty of open and just votes,” Verdier stated. “We thus caution against employing AI assistants for election recommendations, as their functioning is opaque and hard to confirm.”
Election Context and Political Landscape
Netherlands citizens vote on 29 October in an electoral contest that will be closely watched around Europe for the performance of the Freedom party.
The far-right party of Wilders is leading the polls but the gap to the GroenLinks-PvdA and CDA appears to be narrowing, with numerous electors still undecided.
Every significant political faction have ruled out an alliance with the PVV, implying the party that comes second is highly probable to supply the future head of government.
Unintentional Bias Linked to AI Operation
The authority stressed that the bots were not deliberately biased, and that their “noted flaws” are a result of the way AI chatbots operate.
