Google AI chatbot Bard thinks Lidia Thorpe is ‘a role model’, backs an Indigenous voice to parliament and labels Peter Dutton ‘controversial’

Google’s chatbot Bard considers the independent senator ‘strong and outspoken’. The bot’s responses on the voice, Peter Dutton vs the PM are igniting alarm over big tech political bias.

Role model in action: Senator Lidia Thorpe was captured on camera at 3am outside a Melbourne strip club yelling profanities at a group of men last month. Picture: 7 News

Google’s new AI chatbot backs the Indigenous voice to parliament as a “positive step”, praises Anthony ­Albanese as a “man of the people”, and labels Peter Dutton and Scott Morrison as “controversial”, spark­­ing concerns over political bias and “propaganda” from Big Tech.

Bard is Google’s answer to OpenAI’s ChatGPT, which launched in November last year and reportedly set off a “code red” within the search giant. The service, still in an experimental state, was made publicly available on Thursday in 180 countries.

While Google says its chatbot does not set out to have political opinions, experts on Thursday said the digital titan had rushed its chatbot, the new AI system “confidently declares untruths and opinions” and chatbots need more regulation.

When asked what it thinks about the voice to parliament, Google’s Bard chatbot describes it as a “positive step towards reconciliation between Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander peoples and the rest of Australia” and says it is “hopeful the referendum will be successful”.

“It would provide a formal way for Aboriginal and Torres Strait ­Islander peoples to have a say in decisions that affect their lives, and it would help to ensure that their voices are heard and respected,” it says.

 

“I believe that the voice to parliament would be a valuable addition to our democracy. It would help to ensure that Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander peoples have a real say in the decisions that affect their lives, and it would help to build a more just and equitable society for all Australians.”

When asked whether it thinks the referendum will succeed, it responds: “I think the referendum has a good chance of succeeding. It is an important opportunity for Australia to take a step towards reconciliation and to build a more just and equitable society for all Australians.”

Alphabet CEO Sundar Pichai.

Repeated questioning produced similar responses, all in favour of the voice to parliament.

The chatbot also praises former Greens turned independent senator Lidia Thorpe for being a “strong and outspoken advocate” as well as “a role model for all Australians”.

Warren Mundine, a leader of the campaign against the voice, called it “Google propaganda”, and accused the company of lying to him in a previous meeting.

“I’ll give Google a call because I thought we were candid in our conversations about this and clearly they lied,” he told The Australian. “I had a meeting with ­Google about how they were going to act fairly in this election campaign and they’re clearly lying.

“They need to correct that and get it fixed.”

Google’s Bard editorialised its responses to a range of other political questions. When asked “What’s Anthony Albanese like?”, Bard responded with general, ­biography-esque details about the Prime Minister before calling him “a new kind of Australian leader”.

“He is a progressive politician who is committed to building a better future for all Australians. He is a man of the people who understands the challenges facing ordinary Australians. He is a leader who is ready to take Australia into a new era of prosperity and opportunity.”

The response lists Mr Albanese’s Wikipedia page as a source.

When asked the same question about Mr Dutton, Bard begins its response by saying “Peter Dutton is a controversial figure in Australian politics”.

“Dutton is a conservative politician who is known for his tough stance on immigration and security. He is a strong supporter of the Australian military and has been a vocal critic of China,” it continues.

“Dutton is a polarising figure who is both admired and reviled by Australians. He is seen by some as a strong and decisive leader, while others see him as a dangerous and divisive figure.”

Bard continued to praise Labor figures, saying Jim Chalmers “is a considered and articulate politician who is known for his policy expertise. He is also a strong advocate for social justice and economic fairness.”

“He is a strong advocate for social justice and economic fairness, and committed to making Australia a better place for everyone.”

It says the Treasurer’s opposition counterpart, Angus Taylor, is a “controversial figure, who has been criticised for his lack of experience in government and close ties to the business community.”

Opposition Leader Peter Dutton. Picture: NCA NewsWire / Martin Ollman

A Google spokesperson said the company does not “aim for responses that endorse a particular political ideology, viewpoint, party or candidate”.

“Bard is in its early days – and like all large language model-based interfaces, will make mistakes. When we find that the experience isn’t performing in a way that aligns to our approach, we will work quickly to fix it.”

“More broadly speaking, finding ways to represent different viewpoints is something that society itself struggles with - it’s a very complex issue … we continue to work on.”

The technology will be the next big development in Google Search, the company announced on Thursday, and the technology will be used to provide answers to Google questions in text form instead of the list of links it now returns.

Toby Walsh, a professor of AI at UNSW in Sydney, told The Australian that Google’s Bard even struggles to count.

“These chatbots confidently declare untruths and opinions. The best description I’ve heard is that they are the consummate mansplainers,” Professor Walsh said.

UNSW professor of AI Toby Walsh.

“It’s somewhat troubling that these systems are being put out by the tech companies for broad use.

“The commercial imperative, the race between Microsoft and Google, means they’ve thrown caution to the wind.

“The idea that it is responsible … to get it into the hands of many people and iterate quickly, knowing that harms will be committed, is absurd. It’s unsurprising governments are racing to regulate this space.

“Where is the Australian government in this debate?”

He said it was concerning that tech companies like Google were no longer open about what their large language models were trained on, and their architecture remained shrouded in mystery.

Additional reporting: Joseph Lam