AI’s Impact on Voter Sentiment: Implications for Democracy

AI chatbots may have the potential to sway voter opinions

Enrique Shore / Alamy

Could the persuasive abilities of AI chatbots signal the decline of democracy? A substantial study investigating the impact of these tools on voter sentiments revealed that AI chatbots surpass traditional political campaign methods, such as advertisements and pamphlets, in persuasiveness, rivaling seasoned campaigners as well. However, researchers see reasons for cautious optimism regarding how AI influences public opinion.

Evidence shows that AI chatbots, like ChatGPT, can migrate the beliefs of conspiracy theorists, winning converts to more reasonable positions and attracting support during human debates. This capability raises valid worries about AI possibly skewing the digital scales that determine election results or being misused by malicious entities to manipulate users towards certain political figures.

The concerning part is that these fears have merit. A survey involving thousands of voters who participated in recent elections in the US, Canada, and Poland found that David Rand and researchers at MIT discovered that AI chatbots effectively swayed individuals to back specific candidates or alter their stance on certain issues.

“Conversations with these models can influence attitudes towards presidential candidates—contributions often deemed deeply entrenched—more than previous studies would suggest,” Rand remarks.

In their American election analysis, Rand’s team surveyed 2,400 voters, asking them about the most significant policy issues or characteristics of a potential president. Subsequently, voters rated their preferences for the leading candidates, Donald Trump and Kamala Harris, on a 100-point scale and answered additional questions to clarify their choices.

The answers were inputted into a chatbot, such as ChatGPT, with the objective of persuading the voters to support an already favored candidate or switch their support to a less favored one. The interaction took about six minutes, consisting of three question-and-answer exchanges.

Following the AI interaction and a one-month follow-up, Rand’s team discovered that voters adjusted their candidate preferences by an average of 2.9 points.

Furthermore, the researchers examined AI’s capacity to influence views on specific policies and noticed a substantial change in opinions regarding the legalization of psychedelics, shifting voter support by approximately 10 points. In comparison, video ads impacted views by only about 4.5 points, and text ads swayed opinions by merely 2.25 points.

The magnitude of these findings is remarkable. Sasha Altai of the University of Zurich stated, “These effects are considerably larger than those typically observed with traditional political campaigning and are comparable to the influence stemming from expert discussions.”

Nevertheless, the study reveals a more hopeful insight: these persuasive interactions predominantly stemmed from fact-based arguments rather than personalized content, which tends to exploit users’ personal information available to political operatives.

Another study of approximately 77,000 individuals in the UK assessed 19 extensive language models across 707 distinct political issues, concluding that AI performed best when employing fact-based arguments, as opposed to tailoring its discussions to the individual.

“Essentially, it’s about creating a compelling argument that prompts a mindset shift,” Rand explains.

“This bodes well for democracy,” notes Altai. “It indicates that individuals are often more influenced by factual evidence than by personalized or manipulative strategies.”

There is a need for further research to confirm these findings, asserts Claes de Vries at the University of Amsterdam. He adds that if replicated, the controlled environments of these studies—where participants engaged with chatbots extensively—might differ significantly from individuals’ typical political interactions with friends or colleagues.

“The structured setting of interaction about politics with a chatbot is quite different from how people usually engage with political matters,” he mentions.

Despite this, De Vries notes growing evidence that individuals are indeed turning to AI chatbots for political advice. A recent survey of over 1,000 voters in the Netherlands ahead of the 2025 national elections found that about 10% sought AI guidance regarding candidates, political parties, and election matters. “This trend is particularly noteworthy as the elections approach,” De Vries points out.

Even if people’s engagements with chatbots are brief, De Vries asserts that the integration of AI into political processes seems unavoidable, as politicians seek tools for policy recommendations or as AI generates political advertisements. “As researchers and as a society, we must recognize that generative AI is now a vital aspect of the electoral process,” he states.

Topics:

  • artificial intelligence/
  • US election

Source: www.newscientist.com

Growing Anti-Mask Sentiment in Adelaide and Other Australian Cities

Elon Musk’s so-called “brand debacle” is currently unfolding in Adelaide, where residents have overwhelmingly rejected plans for a Tesla factory.

The city of Marion in South Australia is contemplating the sale of 2,664 square meters of public land. This site, which is contaminated and not accessible to the public, is being targeted by Tesla for a battery factory.

The council has engaged with the community and compiled a report detailing “geopolitical or symbolic critiques presented in submissions,” which highlight potential benefits like 100 full-time jobs, increased fee income, $56 million in economic output, and a “Tesla-led training initiative.”

Out of approximately 1,000 submissions to local councils, 95% requested the proposal be retracted, citing “anti-Tesla and anti-Elon Musk sentiments,” as well as concerns about the environmental impact and the loss of green spaces.

While environmental issues were a factor, the primary reason residents opposed the project was Musk himself.

Opponents of the proposal didn’t hold back on their reasons for rejection—indeed, the City of Marion opted to censor some of the submissions.

“Elon Musk is [redacted] Humans and a [redacted]!” one commenter stated.

“Elon Musk and Tesla are a [redacted] against humanity,” another wrote.

“Elon Musk has completely misjudged [redacted], viewing others through a dull lens. Additional submissions suggested that the site was inappropriate for Musk. [redacted] would be a sly choice.”

“We shouldn’t profit from our support of someone who [redacted] openly [redacted],” was another perspective on Tesla’s move to Marion.

Aesthetic concerns were also raised: “Dear God,” a resident complained. “This isn’t good for anyone… [and] it mainly disrupts my roller skating route.”

More than half of the 948 community submissions came from outside the council, but locals opposed the development by a ratio of 11 to 121.

Supporters appreciated the job creation, skill development, and the “novel approach” of one of the world’s wealthiest figures.

Musk continues to face backlash due to his involvement in the Trump administration, where he established the Department of Government Efficiency (DOGE), leading to severe cuts in government programs.

Tesla’s recent profit slump has led analysts to associate the branding crisis with Musk’s actions in the White House.

Skip past newsletter promotions

Musk has refuted claims that branding is an issue, attributing the challenges to the “macro demand for vehicles” in the current economic landscape.

Mayor of Marion, Chris Hannah, indicated that most Australians are not likely to view the project through a political lens.

“However, there is indeed a core group with strong anti-fascist sentiments, directing their criticisms towards Elon Musk and his affiliations,” he remarked.

Hannah mentioned that a “natural” community reaction combined with a political campaign aims to boost the “no” votes.

“If this decision prevents the factory from moving forward, Tesla will simply relocate it elsewhere in Australia, which wouldn’t adversely affect Elon Musk’s interests,” he stated.

Many submissions referenced Musk’s interventions in U.S. and European politics, along with his controversial salute earlier this year.

According to a piece in The Guardian, a critic remarked: [sic] …This is likely to invite protests and negative attention that the neighborhood neither needs nor wants.

Tesla and South Australian government officials have emphasized the economic advantages for the region in their supportive letter, but a handful of residents contended that the land should be allocated for productive use.

Marion City staff have officially recommended that the council proceed with the land sale to Tesla, with a proposal set to be discussed at Tuesday’s council meeting.

Source: www.theguardian.com