AI chatbots have been shown to be “unreliable and clearly biased” when providing election recommendations, the Netherlands’ data watchdog has stated, issuing warnings about a potential threat to democratic processes just over a week before national elections.
Study Shows Repeated Partiality in Chatbot Recommendations
The four chatbots evaluated by the AP “often end up with the same two parties”, regardless of the user’s question or command, the watchdog noted in a analysis published ahead of the 29 October election.
In more than half of the cases, the AI recommended either the right-wing PVV of Geert Wilders or the progressive GroenLinks-PvdA led by the former European Commission vice-president Frans Timmermans.
Certain groups, such as the centre-right CDA, “are rarely ever cited”, even when the user’s input precisely aligns with the positions of these parties, the report indicated.
Official Warns Against Using AI Chatbots for Voting Guidance
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 party that did not necessarily align with their ideological beliefs, she emphasized.
“This directly impacts a cornerstone of democracy: the integrity of free and fair elections,” said Verdier. “We thus caution against using AI chatbots for election recommendations, as their functioning is opaque and hard to confirm.”
Election Context and Party Dynamics
Netherlands citizens vote on 29 October in an election that will be closely watched across the continent for the showing of the PVV.
The right-leaning group of Geert Wilders is leading the polls but the lead over the GroenLinks-PvdA and CDA appears to be narrowing, with many voters yet to make up their minds.
Every significant political faction have rejected a coalition with the Freedom party, implying the runner-up party is most likely to provide the next prime minister.
Unintentional Bias Attributed to AI Operation
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.
