AI chatbots have been shown to be “inaccurate and evidently prejudiced” when offering voting advice, the Dutch data protection authority (AP) has reported, issuing warnings about a potential threat to democracy just eight days before national elections.
Testing Reveals Repeated Partiality in Chatbot Recommendations
The quartet of AI assistants tested by the AP “frequently recommend identical two parties”, irrespective of the user’s question or command, the watchdog noted in a report published ahead of the 29 October election.
In more than half of the cases, the AI recommended either the far-right Freedom party (PVV) of the politician Geert Wilders or the progressive GroenLinks-PvdA led by the ex-EU commissioner Frans Timmermans.
Certain groups, such as the centre-right CDA, “are rarely ever cited”, even when the voter’s query exactly matches the positions of these parties, the study pointed out.
Official Warns Against Using AI Chatbots for Election Advice
The deputy head of the data protection agency, 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 party that did not necessarily align with their political views, she added.
“This immediately affects a fundamental pillar of democracy: the honesty of open and just votes,” Verdier stated. “We therefore warn against using AI chatbots for voting advice, as their operation is unclear and hard to confirm.”
Election Context and Party Dynamics
Netherlands citizens vote on 29 October in an electoral contest that will be closely watched across the continent for the performance of the Freedom party.
The right-leaning group of Wilders is ahead in surveys but the lead over the left-wing and centre-right parties seems to be closing, with many voters still undecided.
All major parties have rejected a coalition with the Freedom party, meaning the party that comes second is most likely to provide the next prime minister.
Inadvertent Prejudice Linked to AI Operation
The AP emphasised that the bots were not deliberately biased, and that their “noted flaws” are a result of the manner in which AI assistants function.
