Gotham Gazette

The Place for New York Policy and politics

Opinion

Opinion

Let’s Give New Yorkers Sweet Transparency — Lives are At Risk


brave heart bk

Fast food drinks (photo: @brraveheart)


A fast-food combo meal, perfect for lunch in a New York minute, right? Not so fast. A recent study of fast-food chain restaurants found that the default drink size included with combo meals at most restaurants contains more than an entire day’s worth of added sugars.

With New Yorkers resorting to fast food out of convenience or necessity due to limited access to healthier options, it becomes an issue of public health and equity to ensure that every consumer has the information they need to make informed decisions about the food that they put in their bodies. Excessive salt warnings are already in place in New York City, why not the same for added sugars? 

That is why the New York City Council must pass Intro. 1326, a bill that would require chain restaurants to post an added sugar warning icon on food and drink items that contain more than a day’s worth of added sugars. Consumers are currently in the dark about the amount of added sugars in made-to-order food and fountain drinks. Thus, it is essential that all menu items (not just prepackaged items) receive an added sugar warning icon when they contain excessive amounts of sugar. There is no more powerful tool than information and this bill puts the power back in the hands of consumers to make informed choices. 

Studies show the deep importance of this issue to personal and public health.

The Center for Science in the Public Interest (CSPI) found that most medium-size fountain colas pack in more than 1.5 days’ worth of added sugars. Ordering a large cola? Two days’ worth. Perhaps most concerning, all of the “kid” sized drinks exceeded daily added sugar recommendations for 1- to 3-year-olds. The convenience of a combo meal or quick takeout from fast-food chains comes at a steep price to our health.

In conjunction with its study of soda offerings at fast-food restaurants, CSPI conducted a poll in New York State and found overwhelming support across diverse groups for added sugar warning icons, similar to the salt warning icons already required in New York City. Eighty-five percent (85%) of New York City residents support warnings in chain restaurants on food and drink items that contain more than a day’s worth of added sugars. 

New York City has been at the forefront in empowering people with information to make the best health decisions for themselves and their families. We were the first city in the United States to adopt sodium warning labels in 2015.

Since then, the evidence has continued to mount about the harmful consequences of a diet high in added sugars, especially for children. Nearly half of our elementary school children do not have a healthy weight. More troubling, 20% of kindergarten students and 25% of Head Start students have obesity, putting them at risk for Type 2 diabetes.

We know how challenging the last 16 months have been for our restaurants, and we must continue to find ways to ensure that our small businesses are able to recover stronger. This bill is not designed to put unreasonable strain on our small businesses and restaurants. It is just one of the many tools we need to implement to reduce disparate health outcomes and chronic disease in our city. 

There are many health and food equity issues that must be addressed in the coming years as we recover from this pandemic, and this is just one small step forward. Consumers want and deserve transparency from restaurants when it comes to making decisions about their health. Let’s give it to them.

***
New York City Council Member Mark Levine represents District 7 and is Chair of the Council’s Health Committee. Lesley Kroupa, JD, MS, RD is the Interim Policy Director of the Laurie M. Tisch Center for Food, Education & Policy at Teachers College, Columbia University. On Twitter @MarkLevineNYC & @LesleyKroupa.

***
Have an op-ed idea or submission for Gotham Gazette? Email This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it.

Surveillance and The City: NYC’s Delivery Data Dilemma


attends deliver resta

Delivery (photo: Emil Cohen/City Council)


Small restaurants have always been the lifeblood of New York City, and as we struggle to emerge from the devastation of the past year, the New York City Council is right to support these crucial businesses. The sweeping shift we saw in restaurant regulation in 2020 saved New York City dining as we know it, including expanded outdoor dining, reducing permit requirements, and (most enjoyably) allowing drinks to go. But this legislative effort has taken an unappetizing turn with the Council’s latest set of proposals, serving up your data as the main course.

Last month, the New York City Council held a hearing on Intro. 2311, a bill that would force delivery apps to share your data with restaurants. Even as professional privacy advocates, we were torn about whether to speak out against the move. That’s because, at the end of the day, we’d side with our local pizza joint over the likes of Grubhub every time. But as well-intentioned as this bill may be, the details are concerning.

Sharing a customer’s name, phone number, e-mail address, delivery address, and the contents of their order is easy for a single meal, but it gets a lot harder for a city that orders thousands of deliveries every hour. But what happens to that data next is the concerning part.

Under the new law, restaurants would be able to use that information however they want. If they want to advertise you lunch specials, that doesn’t sound too bad. But if they want to sell that data to credit firms, insurers, and your boss, then this all starts to sound very, very creepy.

Simply put, this is heading in the wrong direction. We should be limiting the way that the delivery apps can monetize our data, rather than inviting every restaurant we order from to do the same. And while the terms of service with delivery apps are usually problematic, this law would wipe away what few rights consumers have under these contracts.

It may seem harmless enough to put this information in the hands of your local takeout place, but just wait for the feeding frenzy of data brokers who step in to buy up the information. Times are still tough for many restaurants, and even pre-pandemic a lot of them struggled to keep the lights on. Can we really expect them to say “no” when the data firms start offering them a lifeline? We should give restaurants every financial support we can, but not if it comes at the cost of increased spam, identity theft, and stalking.

This is what data brokers do, they buy up our information wherever they can and then sell it to the highest bidder, damning the consequences. And there is no reason to let our data be siphoned off from delivery apps, especially when there are so many other steps that the Council can be taking to help small restaurants.

Intro. 2311 was introduced as part of a seven-bill restaurant rescue package. Other measures include a new “food establishment surcharge,” a suspension of sidewalk café fees, and termination of personal liability on commercial leases. Helping restaurant owners know they won’t go bankrupt if they lose their business does far more to help than handing out our delivery data.

If the Council does insist on data portability, they need to mandate privacy protections and a ban on data resale. If we want this data to benefit small businesses, we need to make sure that no one else can buy or steal it from them. Above all, New York should continue to push for protections against having any of our data misused when it falls in the wrong hands.

***
Albert Fox Cahn is the founder and executive director of the Surveillance Technology Oversight Project (S.T.O.P.), a New York–based civil rights and privacy group, and a fellow at Yale Law School’s Information Society Project and the Engelberg Center for Innovation Law & Policy at New York University School of Law. On Twitter @FoxCahn & @StopSpyingNY.

Levy is a communications intern at S.T.O.P. and a rising senior at Tulane University.

***
Have an op-ed idea or submission for Gotham Gazette? Email This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it.

Staten Islanders’ Compassion Must Come Through for Our Communities Again


si cm rose

Council Member Rose, back left, is the author (photo: John McCarten/City Council)


We Staten Islanders pride ourselves on being a borough that cares for our own, often railing against the “forgotten borough syndrome” and always taking on the powers that be seeking our fair share. 

During the early days of the pandemic, we begged, pleaded, and fought to get PPE for residents, family, friends, first responders, and essential workers to protect them from the scourge of COVID-19 — the highly contagious and deadly disease that has ravaged our city.

Back in the early days of the pandemic people were on ventilators and there weren’t enough to go around. We didn’t really know how to treat COVID-19 and were ill-equipped to address the devastating number of cases. Heck, we weren’t even sure if masks and hand-sanitizer were an adequate defense.

Funeral homes were overwhelmed by the number of deceased people, so much so that they had to send our loved ones to the Brooklyn Army Terminal or rent refrigerated trucks to hold our precious departed until they could be given a proper burial or cremation. 

Remember how it felt to not be able to see our loved ones even for brief visits, missing grandma and grandpa, grandchildren, boyfriends, girlfriends, cousins, friends, and more. Remember what it was like to miss celebrations, weddings, birthdays, graduations, proms, religious celebrations and church services, sporting events, and even just going to the store or having lunch with a friend. Maybe some of you even missed going to work in an office or other job site. 

And what parent doesn’t remember the horrors of remote learning!

If none of this impacted you and your sensibilities, the scarcity of toilet paper and Lysol certainly elevated your fear and anxiety level. 

To remember the worst of our pandemic experiences should arouse us to take the necessary action to eradicate this disease and live our lives. Taking the covid vaccine moves us closer to that possibility. 

City health officials said recently that in all of New York City, the one place where you’re most likely to catch COVID-19 is Staten Island. We must not accept that as the status quo.

Getting vaccinated is not a political issue nor is it one of government overreach. It is about health and safety — for you, for your loved ones, for your communities, for our borough, and for our city.

COVID-19 merely poses another challenge, and we on Staten Island are very used to overcoming challenges. Our resilience in the face of challenge motivated us to unselfishly put our personal feelings aside and help our friends, family, and neighbors in the aftermath of Hurricane Sandy. All of us came together for the greater good of others then, and I’m asking now that you view getting vaccinated through that same lens of unselfish caring for others.

Please get vaccinated!

***
Deborah Rose is the New York City Council Member, District 49, representing parts of Staten Island. On Twitter @CMDebiRose.

***
Have an op-ed idea or submission for Gotham Gazette? Email This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it.



Print Friendly and PDF

Editor's Choice


Gotham Gazette: New York Voters Approve $4.2 Billion Environmental Bond Act
New York Voters Approve $4.2 Billion Environmental Bond Act
Gotham Gazette: 
New York City Voters Approve Racial Justice Ballot Measures
New York City Voters Approve Racial Justice Ballot Measures
Gotham Gazette: 
Housing Development in New York City Slows to a Crawl as Officials Debate Tax Incentives
Housing Development in New York City Slows to a Crawl as Officials Debate Tax Incentives
Gotham Gazette: 
City Council Examines Low Voter Turnout, Moving Local Elections to Even Years City Council Examines Low Voter Turnout, Moving Local Elections to Even Years