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.
Study Shows Consistent Bias in Chatbot Recommendations
The four chatbots evaluated by the authority “frequently recommend identical two parties”, regardless of the user’s question or command, the regulator explained in a analysis published ahead of the late October vote.
In more than half of the cases, the AI recommended either the far-right Freedom party (PVV) of Geert Wilders or the progressive GroenLinks-PvdA headed by the former European Commission vice-president 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 Using AI Chatbots for Voting Guidance
The deputy head of the AP, the official Monique Verdier, stated that while chatbots may seem like clever tools, “for election guidance, they repeatedly fall short”. Voters were being pushed toward a political group 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 therefore warn against using AI chatbots for election recommendations, as their functioning is opaque and difficult to verify.”
Voting Background and Political Landscape
The Dutch head to the polls on October 29 in an electoral contest that will be keenly observed around Europe for the showing of the Freedom party.
The right-leaning group of Wilders is ahead in surveys but the lead over the GroenLinks-PvdA and CDA seems to be closing, with many voters still undecided.
All major parties have ruled out an alliance with the PVV, implying the runner-up party is highly probable to provide the next prime minister.
Inadvertent Prejudice Attributed to AI Operation
The authority stressed that the AI systems were not intentionally prejudiced, and that their “noted flaws” are a consequence of the manner in which AI assistants function.
