AI chatbots are proving to be “unreliable and clearly biased” when offering voting advice, 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 Consistent Bias in Chatbot Recommendations
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 late October vote.
For over 50% of instances, the AI recommended either the right-wing PVV of Geert Wilders or the progressive GroenLinks-PvdA led by the ex-EU commissioner Frans Timmermans.
Certain groups, such as the centre-right CDA, “are almost never mentioned”, even when the voter’s query exactly matches the positions of these parties, the report pointed out.
Official Warns Against Relying on AI Assistants 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 cornerstone of democracy: the honesty of open and just votes,” said Verdier. “We therefore warn against using AI chatbots for election recommendations, as their operation is unclear and hard to confirm.”
Election Context and Political Landscape
The Dutch head to the polls on 29 October in an election that will be keenly observed across the continent for the showing of the Freedom party.
The far-right party of Wilders is ahead in surveys but the lead over the GroenLinks-PvdA and CDA seems to be closing, with many voters yet to make up their minds.
Every significant political faction have ruled out an alliance with the PVV, meaning the party that comes second is highly probable to provide the next prime minister.
Inadvertent Prejudice Linked to Chatbot Functioning
The authority stressed that the bots were not deliberately biased, and that their “noted flaws” are a result of the manner in which AI assistants function.
