AI assistants have been shown to be “inaccurate and evidently prejudiced” when providing election recommendations, the Netherlands’ data watchdog has stated, issuing warnings about a possible risk to democracy just over a week before the country’s general election.
Testing Reveals Consistent Bias in AI Suggestions
The four chatbots tested by the authority “frequently recommend identical two parties”, regardless of the user’s question or command, the regulator noted in a report published ahead of the 29 October election.
In more than half of the cases, the chatbot suggested either the far-right Freedom party (PVV) of the politician 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 user’s input precisely aligns with the stances of these political entities, the study indicated.
Authority Figure Cautions Against Relying on AI Assistants for Election Advice
The vice-chair of the AP, Monique Verdier, commented 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 voting advice, as their functioning is opaque and hard to confirm.”
Voting Background and Political Landscape
The Dutch head to the polls on October 29 in an election that will be keenly observed across the continent for the showing of the PVV.
The right-leaning group of Wilders is leading the polls but the lead over the GroenLinks-PvdA and CDA seems to be closing, with numerous electors yet to make up their minds.
All major parties have rejected a coalition with the PVV, meaning the runner-up party is most likely to provide the next prime minister.
Inadvertent Prejudice 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.
