The Dutch political landscape has been stirred by revelations that Prime Minister Rob Jetten and his D66 party have utilized artificial intelligence to craft a substantial number of their social media posts. This practice has sparked a debate over the authenticity and public trust in political communications. An analysis of 1,812 posts from Jetten and D66’s accounts on platforms such as X, Instagram, Facebook, and LinkedIn since 2021 found that at least 232 posts were generated using AI chatbots, with 68 originating from Jetten’s personal accounts and 164 from the party’s accounts.
The use of AI in their communications notably increased following the collapse of the Schoof I Cabinet in June 2025, with approximately 30% of the posts from Jetten and D66 identified as AI-generated during that period. Furthermore, AI tools were employed in creating parts of Jetten’s book “Hoe het wél kan” and several lines in three campaign videos for D66. The inclusion of AI in these posts is particularly controversial because some tackled sensitive topics, such as the war in Ukraine, the MH17 disaster commemoration, and apologies to the Moluccan community.
D66 has acknowledged its use of AI, emphasizing that all content undergoes review and refinement by their staff. They maintain that posts on Jetten’s personal accounts are based on his input, with final approval or edits made by him. Despite these assurances, experts are raising concerns about the potential impact on Jetten’s credibility. Claes de Vreese, a professor at the University of Amsterdam, highlighted the risk that AI-generated language poses in blurring the lines between a politician’s genuine views and machine-created messaging.
This situation has prompted broader discussions about transparency and the implications of AI in political communication. Such questions are particularly pertinent when official social media accounts are expected to convey the personal perspectives and words of elected officials. As AI technology becomes more prevalent in political arenas, the challenge lies in ensuring that its use does not compromise the authenticity and trustworthiness of public communications.