AI assistants are proving to be “inaccurate and evidently prejudiced” when providing election recommendations, the Netherlands’ data watchdog has stated, raising alarms about a possible risk to democratic processes just eight days before the country’s general election.
Study Shows Repeated Partiality in Chatbot Recommendations
The four chatbots evaluated by the AP “often end up with the same two parties”, regardless of the voter’s inquiry or input, the watchdog explained in a analysis published ahead of the 29 October election.
For over 50% of instances, the AI recommended either the far-right Freedom party (PVV) of Geert Wilders or the leftwing GroenLinks-PvdA led by the ex-EU commissioner Frans Timmermans.
Certain groups, such as the moderate CDA, “are almost never mentioned”, despite the fact that the user’s input exactly matches the positions of these political entities, the study indicated.
Authority Figure Cautions 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, “for election guidance, they repeatedly fall short”. Voters were being pushed toward a political group 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 therefore warn against using AI chatbots for voting advice, as their functioning is opaque and hard to confirm.”
Election Context and Party Dynamics
The Dutch head to the polls on 29 October in an election that will be closely watched around Europe for the performance of the PVV.
The far-right party of Wilders is leading the polls but the lead over the left-wing and centre-right parties appears to be narrowing, with many voters yet to make up their minds.
Every significant political faction have rejected a coalition with the PVV, meaning the runner-up party is highly probable to supply the future head of government.
Unintentional Bias Linked to Chatbot Functioning
The AP stressed that the AI systems were not intentionally prejudiced, and that their “noted flaws” are a consequence of the manner in which AI assistants function.
