🔗 Share this article

AI assistants are proving to be “inaccurate and evidently prejudiced” when offering voting advice, the Netherlands’ data watchdog has reported, raising alarms about a possible risk to democratic processes just over a week before national elections.

Study Shows Consistent Bias in AI Suggestions

The quartet of AI assistants tested by the authority “often end up with the same two parties”, irrespective of the user’s question or command, the watchdog noted in a report published ahead of the 29 October election.

For over 50% of instances, the AI recommended either the right-wing PVV of Geert Wilders or the leftwing GroenLinks-PvdA headed by the ex-EU commissioner Frans Timmermans.

Certain groups, such as the moderate CDA, “are rarely ever cited”, despite the fact that the user’s input exactly matches the positions of these political entities, the study pointed out.

Authority Figure Cautions Against Using AI Chatbots for Election Advice

The vice-chair of the AP, Monique Verdier, stated that while chatbots may seem like clever tools, “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 added.

“This immediately affects a cornerstone of democracy: the integrity of free and fair elections,” said Verdier. “We thus caution against employing AI assistants for election recommendations, as their functioning is opaque and difficult to verify.”

Voting Background and Political Landscape

The Dutch head to the polls on 29 October in an election that will be keenly observed around Europe for the showing of the Freedom party.

The right-leaning group of Wilders is leading the polls but the lead over the left-wing and centre-right parties appears to be narrowing, with numerous electors still undecided.

All major parties have rejected a coalition with the PVV, implying the party that comes second is highly probable to provide the next prime minister.

Inadvertent Prejudice Attributed to AI Operation

The AP 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.