AI assistants are proving to be “unreliable and clearly biased” when providing election recommendations, the Netherlands’ data watchdog has reported, issuing warnings about a potential threat to democracy just over a week before national elections.
Study Shows Consistent Bias in AI Suggestions
The quartet of AI assistants evaluated by the AP “often end up with the same two parties”, irrespective of the user’s question or command, the watchdog noted in a analysis published ahead of the late October vote.
In more than half of the cases, the AI recommended either the right-wing PVV of Geert Wilders or the progressive GroenLinks-PvdA led by the former European Commission vice-president Frans Timmermans.
Certain groups, such as the centre-right CDA, “are almost never mentioned”, even when the user’s input precisely aligns with the positions of these political entities, the report indicated.
Authority Figure Cautions Against Using AI Chatbots for Election Advice
The deputy head of the AP, Monique Verdier, commented that while AI assistants appear to be smart resources, “for election guidance, they repeatedly fall short”. Citizens were being steered toward a party that did not necessarily align with their ideological beliefs, she emphasized.
“This directly impacts a fundamental pillar of democracy: the honesty of open and just votes,” Verdier stated. “We thus caution against using AI chatbots for voting advice, as their functioning is opaque and hard to confirm.”
Voting Background and Party Dynamics
Netherlands citizens vote on 29 October in an election that will be closely watched around Europe for the showing of the PVV.
The right-leaning group of Geert Wilders is leading the polls but the lead over the left-wing and centre-right parties appears to be narrowing, with numerous electors yet to make up their minds.
Every significant political faction have rejected a coalition with the PVV, implying the party that comes second is most likely to provide the next prime minister.
Unintentional Bias Attributed 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.
