AI assistants are proving to be “inaccurate and evidently prejudiced” when offering voting advice, the Netherlands’ data watchdog has stated, issuing warnings about a possible risk to democracy just over a week before national elections.
Testing Reveals Repeated Partiality in AI Suggestions
The quartet of AI assistants tested by the authority “often end up with the same two parties”, irrespective of the voter’s inquiry or input, the regulator explained in a analysis released ahead of the 29 October election.
For over 50% of instances, the chatbot suggested 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 user’s input precisely aligns with the stances of these political entities, the report indicated.
Authority Figure Cautions Against Relying on AI Assistants for Voting Guidance
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 did not necessarily align with their political views, she emphasized.
“This directly impacts a cornerstone of democracy: the integrity of free and fair elections,” said Verdier. “We therefore warn against using AI chatbots 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 election that will be keenly observed around Europe for the performance of the PVV.
The far-right party of Wilders is ahead in surveys but the gap to the GroenLinks-PvdA and CDA appears to be narrowing, with numerous electors yet to make up their minds.
Every significant political faction have rejected a coalition with the Freedom party, implying the runner-up party is highly probable to supply the future head of government.
Inadvertent Prejudice Linked to AI Operation
The AP stressed that the AI systems were not intentionally prejudiced, and that their “noted flaws” are a result of the manner in which AI assistants function.
