npr--2020-09-11--How Big Oil Misled The Public Into Believing Plastic Would Be Recycled

How Big Oil Misled The Public Into Believing Plastic Would Be Recycled Laura Leebrick , a manager at Rogue Disposal & Recycling in southern Oregon , is standing on the end of its landfill watching an avalanche of plastic trash pour out of a semitrailer : containers , bags , packaging , strawberry containers , yogurt cups .
None of this plastic will be turned into new plastic things .
All of it is buried .
`` To me that felt like it was a betrayal of the public trust , '' she said .
`` I had been lying @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , like most recycling companies , had been sending plastic trash to China , but when China shut its doors two years ago , Leebrick scoured the U.S. for buyers .
She could find only someone who wanted white milk jugs .
She sends the soda bottles to the state .
But when Leebrick tried to tell people the truth about burying all the other plastic , she says people did n't want to hear it .
`` I remember the first meeting where I actually told a city council that it was @ @ @ @ @ @ @ to dispose of the same material as garbage , '' she says , `` and it was like heresy had been spoken in the room : You 're lying .
This is gold .
We take the time to clean it , take the labels off , separate it and put it here .
It 's gold .
This is valuable . ''
But it 's not valuable , and it never has been .
And what 's more , the makers of plastic — the nation 's largest oil and gas companies @ @ @ @ @ @ @ even as they spent millions of dollars telling the American public the opposite .
NPR and PBS Frontline spent months digging into internal industry documents and interviewing top former officials .
We found that the industry sold the public on an idea it knew would n't work — that the majority of plastic could be , and would be , recycled — all while making billions of dollars selling the world new plastic .
The industry 's awareness that recycling would n't keep plastic out of landfills and the environment dates to the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
`` There is serious doubt that [ recycling plastic ] can ever be made viable on an economic basis , '' one industry insider wrote in a 1974 speech .
Yet the industry spent millions telling people to recycle , because , as one former top industry insider told NPR , selling recycling sold plastic , even if it was n't true .
`` If the public thinks that recycling is working , then they are not going to be as concerned about the environment , '' Larry Thomas , former president @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , known today as the Plastics Industry Association and one of the industry 's most powerful trade groups in Washington , D.C. , told NPR .
In response , industry representative Steve Russell , until recently the vice president of plastics for the trade group the American Chemistry Council , said the industry has never intentionally misled the public about recycling and is committed to ensuring all plastic is recycled .
`` The proof is the dramatic amount of investment that is happening right now , '' Russell said .
`` I do @ @ @ @ @ @ @ n't happened in the past , but I think the pressure , the public commitments and , most important , the availability of technology is going to give us a different outcome . ''
Here 's the basic problem : All used plastic can be turned into new things , but picking it up , sorting it out and melting it down is expensive .
Plastic also degrades each time it is reused , meaning it ca n't be reused more than once or twice .
On the other hand , new plastic @ @ @ @ @ @ @ oil and gas , and it 's almost always less expensive and of better quality to just start fresh .
All of these problems have existed for decades , no matter what new recycling technology or expensive machinery has been developed .
But the public has known little about these difficulties .
It could be because that 's not what they were told .
Starting in the 1990s , the public saw an increasing number of commercials and messaging about recycling plastic .
`` The bottle may look empty , yet it 's @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ad from 1990 showing a plastic bottle bouncing out of a garbage truck .
`` It 's full of potential .
... We 've pioneered the country 's largest , most comprehensive plastic recycling program to help plastic fill valuable uses and roles . ''
These commercials carried a distinct message : Plastic is special , and the consumer should recycle it .
It may have sounded like an environmentalist 's message , but the ads were paid for by the plastics industry , made up of companies like Exxon , Chevron , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ trade organizations in Washington .
Industry companies spent tens of millions of dollars on these ads and ran them for years , promoting the benefits of a product that , for the most part , was buried , was burned or , in some cases , wound up in the ocean .
Documents show industry officials knew this reality about recycling plastic as far back as the 1970s .
Many of the industry 's old documents are housed in libraries , such as the one on the grounds of the first DuPont family @ @ @ @ @ @ @ universities , where former industry leaders sent their records .
At Syracuse University , there are boxes of files from a former industry consultant .
And inside one of them is a report written in April 1973 by scientists tasked with forecasting possible issues for top industry executives .
Recycling plastic , it told the executives , was unlikely to happen on a broad scale .
`` There is no recovery from obsolete products , '' it says .
It says pointedly : Plastic degrades with each turnover .
`` A degradation of @ @ @ @ @ @ @ initial fabrication , through aging , and in any reclamation process , '' the report told executives .
Recycling plastic is `` costly , '' it says , and sorting it , the report concludes , is `` infeasible . ''
And there are more documents , echoing decades of this knowledge , including one analysis from a top official at the industry 's most powerful trade group .
`` The costs of separating plastics ... are high , '' he tells colleagues , before noting that the cost of using oil to @ @ @ @ @ @ @ plastic waste `` ca n't yet be justified economically . ''
Larry Thomas , the former president of the Society of the Plastics Industry , worked side by side with top oil and plastics executives .
He 's retired now , on the coast of Florida where he likes to bike , and feels conflicted about the time he worked with the plastics industry .
`` I did what the industry wanted me to do , that 's for sure , '' he says .
`` But my personal views did n't always @ @ @ @ @ @ @ take as part of my job . ''
Thomas took over back in the late 1980s , and back then , plastic was in a crisis .
There was too much plastic trash .
The public was getting upset .
In one document from 1989 , Thomas calls executives at Exxon , Chevron , Amoco , Dow , DuPont , Procter & Gamble and others to a private meeting at the Ritz-Carlton in Washington .
`` The image of plastics is deteriorating at an alarming rate , '' he wrote .
`` We @ @ @ @ @ @ @ . ''
He told the executives they needed to act .
The `` viability of the industry and the profitability of your company '' are at stake .
`` The feeling was the plastics industry was under fire — we got to do what it takes to take the heat off , because we want to continue to make plastic products , '' he says .
At this time , Thomas had a co-worker named Lew Freeman .
He was a vice president of the lobbying group .
He remembers many of the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ `` The basic question on the table was , You guys as our trade association in the plastics industry are n't doing enough — we need to do more , '' Freeman says .
`` I remember this is one of those exchanges that sticks with me 35 years later or however long it 's been ... and it was what we need to do is ... advertise our way out of it .
That was the idea thrown out . ''
So began the plastics industry 's $ 50 million-a-year ad campaign @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Presenting the possibilities of plastic ! ''
one iconic ad blared , showing kids in bike helmets and plastic bags floating in the air .
`` This advertising was motivated first and foremost by legislation and other initiatives that were being introduced in state legislatures and sometimes in Congress , '' Freeman says , `` to ban or curb the use of plastics because of its performance in the waste stream . ''
At the same time , the industry launched a number of feel-good projects , telling the public to recycle plastic @ @ @ @ @ @ @ centers , nonprofits , even expensive benches outside grocery stores made out of plastic bags .
Few of these projects actually turned much plastic into new things .
NPR tracked down almost a dozen projects the industry publicized starting in 1989 .
All of them shuttered or failed by the mid-1990s .
Mobil 's Massachusetts recycling facility lasted three years , for example .
Amoco 's project to recycle plastic in New York schools lasted two .
Dow and Huntsman 's highly publicized plan to recycle plastic in national parks made it to @ @ @ @ @ @ @ companies cut funding .
None of them was able to get past the economics : Making new plastic out of oil is cheaper and easier than making it out of plastic trash .
Both Freeman and Thomas , the head of the lobbying group , say the executives all knew that .
`` There was a lot of discussion about how difficult it was to recycle , '' Thomas remembers .
`` They knew that the infrastructure was n't there to really have recycling amount to a whole lot . ''
Even as @ @ @ @ @ @ @ underway , Thomas and Freeman say industry officials wanted to get recycling plastic into people 's homes and outside on their curbs with blue bins .
The industry created a special group called the Council for Solid Waste Solutions and brought a man from DuPont , Ron Liesemer , over to run it .
Liesemer 's job was to at least try to make recycling work — because there was some hope , he said , however unlikely , that maybe if they could get recycling started , somehow the economics of it @ @ @ @ @ @ @ I had no staff , but I had money , '' Liesemer says .
`` Millions of dollars . ''
Liesemer took those millions out to Minnesota and other places to start local plastic recycling programs .
But then he ran into the same problem all the industry documents found .
Recycling plastic was n't making economic sense : There were too many different kinds of plastic , hundreds of them , and they ca n't be melted down together .
They have to be sorted out .
`` Yes , it can @ @ @ @ @ @ @ `` but who 's going to pay for it ?
Because it goes into too many applications , it goes into too many structures that just would not be practical to recycle . ''
Liesemer says he started as many programs as he could and hoped for the best .
`` They were trying to keep their products on the shelves , '' Liesemer says .
`` That 's what they were focused on .
They were n't thinking what lesson should we learn for the next 20 years .
No .
Solve @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , who led the trade group , says all of these efforts started to have an effect : The message that plastic could be recycled was sinking in .
`` I can only say that after a while , the atmosphere seemed to change , '' he says .
`` I do n't know whether it was because people thought recycling had solved the problem or whether they were so in love with plastic products that they were willing to overlook the environmental concerns that were mounting up . ''
But as the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ past the crisis , officials were also quietly launching a broader plan .
In the early 1990s , at a small recycling facility near San Diego , a man named Coy Smith was one of the first to see the industry 's new initiative .
Back then , Smith ran a recycling business .
His customers were watching the ads and wanted to recycle plastic .
So Smith allowed people to put two plastic items in their bins : soda bottles and milk jugs .
He lost money on them , he says @ @ @ @ @ @ @ steel from his regular business helped offset the costs .
But then , one day , almost overnight , his customers started putting all kinds of plastic in their bins .
`` The symbols start showing up on the containers , '' he explains .
Smith went out to the piles of plastic and started flipping over the containers .
All of them were now stamped with the triangle of arrows — known as the international recycling symbol — with a number in the middle .
He knew right away what was happening @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the consumer is looking at what 's on their soda bottle and they 're looking at what 's on their yogurt tub , and they say , 'Oh well , they both have a symbol .
Oh well , I guess they both go in , ' `` he says .
The bins were now full of trash he could n't sell .
He called colleagues at recycling facilities all across the country .
They reported having the same problem .
Industry documents from this time show that just a couple of years @ @ @ @ @ @ @ and plastics executives began a quiet campaign to lobby almost 40 states to mandate that the symbol appear on all plastic — even if there was no way to economically recycle it .
Some environmentalists also supported the symbol , thinking it would help separate plastic .
Smith said what it did was make all plastic look recyclable .
`` The consumers were confused , '' Smith says .
`` It totally undermined our credibility , undermined what we knew was the truth in our community , not the truth from a lobbying @ @ @ @ @ @ @ lobbying group in D.C. knew the truth in Smith 's community too .
A report given to top officials at the Society of the Plastics Industry in 1993 told them about the problems .
`` The code is being misused , '' it says bluntly .
`` Companies are using it as a 'green ' marketing tool . ''
The code is creating `` unrealistic expectations '' about how much plastic can actually be recycled , it told them .
Smith and his colleagues launched a national protest , started a working group @ @ @ @ @ @ @ get the symbol removed or changed .
They lost .
`` We do n't have manpower to compete with this , '' Smith says .
`` We just do n't .
Even though we were all dedicated , it still was like , can we keep fighting a battle like this on and on and on from this massive industry that clearly has no end in sight of what they 're able to do and willing to do to keep their image the image they want . ''
`` It 's pure manipulation @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
In response , industry officials told NPR that the code was only ever meant to help recycling facilities sort plastic and was not intended to create any confusion .
Without question , plastic has been critical to the country 's success .
It 's cheap and durable , and it 's a chemical marvel .
It 's also hugely profitable .
The oil industry makes more than $ 400 billion a year making plastic , and as demand for oil for cars and trucks declines , the industry is telling shareholders that @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
And if there was a sign of this future , it 's a brand-new chemical plant that rises from the flat skyline outside Sweeny , Texas .
It 's so new that it 's still shiny , and inside the facility , the concrete is free from stains .
This plant is Chevron Phillips Chemical 's $ 6 billion investment in new plastic .
`` We see a very bright future for our products , '' says Jim Becker , the vice president of sustainability for Chevron Phillips , inside a pristine @ @ @ @ @ @ @ `` These are products the world needs and continues to need , '' he says .
`` We 're very optimistic about future growth . ''
With that growth , though , comes ever more plastic trash .
But Becker says Chevron Phillips has a plan : It will recycle 100 % of the plastic it makes by 2040 .
Becker seems earnest .
He tells a story about vacationing with his wife and being devastated by the plastic trash they saw .
When asked how Chevron Phillips will recycle 100 % of @ @ @ @ @ @ @ n't hesitate .
`` Recycling has to get more efficient , more economic , '' he says .
`` We 've got to do a better job , collecting the waste , sorting it .
That 's going to be a huge effort . ''
Fix recycling is the industry 's message too , says Steve Russell , the industry 's recent spokesman .
`` Fixing recycling is an imperative , and we 've got to get it right , '' he says .
`` I understand there is doubt and cynicism .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ check back in .
We 're there . ''
Larry Thomas , Lew Freeman and Ron Liesemer , former industry executives , helped oil companies out of the first plastic crisis by getting people to believe something the industry knew then was n't true : That most plastic could be and would be recycled .
Russell says this time will be different .
`` It did n't get recycled because the system was n't up to par , '' he says .
`` We had n't invested in the ability to sort it @ @ @ @ @ @ @ that companies were willing to buy it , and both of those things exist today . ''
But plastic today is harder to sort than ever : There are more kinds of plastic , it 's cheaper to make plastic out of oil than plastic trash and there is exponentially more of it than 30 years ago .
And during those 30 years , oil and plastic companies made billions of dollars in profit as the public consumed ever more quantities of plastic .
`` And during that time , our members have @ @ @ @ @ @ @ brought us where we are today , '' he says .
`` We are going to be able to make all of our new plastic out of existing municipal solid waste in plastic . ''
Recently , an industry advocacy group funded by the nation 's largest oil and plastic companies launched its most expensive effort yet to promote recycling and cleanup of plastic waste .
There 's even a new ad .
`` We have the people that can change the world , '' it says to soaring music as people pick @ @ @ @ @ @ @ sorted in a recycling center .
Freeman , the former industry official , recently watched the ad .
`` Déjà vu all over again , '' he says as the ad finishes .
`` This is the same kind of thinking that ran in the '90s .
I do n't think this kind of advertising is , is helpful at all . ''
Larry Thomas said the same .
`` I do n't think anything has changed , '' Thomas says .
`` Sounds exactly the same . ''
These days as Thomas @ @ @ @ @ @ @ says he spends a lot of time thinking about the oceans and what will happen to them in 20 or 50 years , long after he is gone .
And as he thinks back to those years he spent in conference rooms with top executives from oil and plastic companies , what occurs to him now is something he says maybe should have been obvious all along .
He says what he saw was an industry that did n't want recycling to work .
Because if the job is to sell as much @ @ @ @ @ @ @ amount of recycled plastic is competition .
`` You know , they were not interested in putting any real money or effort into recycling because they wanted to sell virgin material , '' Thomas says .
`` Nobody that is producing a virgin product wants something to come along that is going to replace it .
Produce more virgin material — that 's their business . ''
And they are .
Analysts now expect plastic production to triple by 2050 .

How Big Oil Misled The Public Into Believing Plastic Would Be Recycled
Enlarge this image toggle caption Laura Sullivan/NPR Laura Sullivan/NPR
Note: An audio version of this story aired on NPR's Planet Money. Listen to the episode here.
Laura Leebrick, a manager at Rogue Disposal & Recycling in southern Oregon, is standing on the end of its landfill watching an avalanche of plastic trash pour out of a semitrailer: containers, bags, packaging, strawberry containers, yogurt cups.
None of this plastic will be turned into new plastic things. All of it is buried.
"To me that felt like it was a betrayal of the public trust," she said. "I had been lying to people ... unwittingly."
Rogue, like most recycling companies, had been sending plastic trash to China, but when China shut its doors two years ago, Leebrick scoured the U.S. for buyers. She could find only someone who wanted white milk jugs. She sends the soda bottles to the state.
But when Leebrick tried to tell people the truth about burying all the other plastic, she says people didn't want to hear it.
"I remember the first meeting where I actually told a city council that it was costing more to recycle than it was to dispose of the same material as garbage," she says, "and it was like heresy had been spoken in the room: You're lying. This is gold. We take the time to clean it, take the labels off, separate it and put it here. It's gold. This is valuable."
But it's not valuable, and it never has been. And what's more, the makers of plastic — the nation's largest oil and gas companies — have known this all along, even as they spent millions of dollars telling the American public the opposite.
In Partnership This story is part of a joint investigation with the PBS series Frontline that includes the documentary Plastic Wars, which aired March 31 on PBS. Watch it online now.
NPR and PBS Frontline spent months digging into internal industry documents and interviewing top former officials. We found that the industry sold the public on an idea it knew wouldn't work — that the majority of plastic could be, and would be, recycled — all while making billions of dollars selling the world new plastic.
The industry's awareness that recycling wouldn't keep plastic out of landfills and the environment dates to the program's earliest days, we found. "There is serious doubt that [recycling plastic] can ever be made viable on an economic basis," one industry insider wrote in a 1974 speech.
Yet the industry spent millions telling people to recycle, because, as one former top industry insider told NPR, selling recycling sold plastic, even if it wasn't true.
"If the public thinks that recycling is working, then they are not going to be as concerned about the environment," Larry Thomas, former president of the Society of the Plastics Industry, known today as the Plastics Industry Association and one of the industry's most powerful trade groups in Washington, D.C., told NPR.
In response, industry representative Steve Russell, until recently the vice president of plastics for the trade group the American Chemistry Council, said the industry has never intentionally misled the public about recycling and is committed to ensuring all plastic is recycled.
"The proof is the dramatic amount of investment that is happening right now," Russell said. "I do understand the skepticism, because it hasn't happened in the past, but I think the pressure, the public commitments and, most important, the availability of technology is going to give us a different outcome."
Here's the basic problem: All used plastic can be turned into new things, but picking it up, sorting it out and melting it down is expensive. Plastic also degrades each time it is reused, meaning it can't be reused more than once or twice.
On the other hand, new plastic is cheap. It's made from oil and gas, and it's almost always less expensive and of better quality to just start fresh.
All of these problems have existed for decades, no matter what new recycling technology or expensive machinery has been developed. In all that time, less than 10 percent of plastic has ever been recycled. But the public has known little about these difficulties.
It could be because that's not what they were told.
Starting in the 1990s, the public saw an increasing number of commercials and messaging about recycling plastic.
"The bottle may look empty, yet it's anything but trash," says one ad from 1990 showing a plastic bottle bouncing out of a garbage truck. "It's full of potential. ... We've pioneered the country's largest, most comprehensive plastic recycling program to help plastic fill valuable uses and roles."
These commercials carried a distinct message: Plastic is special, and the consumer should recycle it.
It may have sounded like an environmentalist's message, but the ads were paid for by the plastics industry, made up of companies like Exxon, Chevron, Dow, DuPont and their lobbying and trade organizations in Washington.
Industry companies spent tens of millions of dollars on these ads and ran them for years, promoting the benefits of a product that, for the most part, was buried, was burned or, in some cases, wound up in the ocean.
Documents show industry officials knew this reality about recycling plastic as far back as the 1970s.
Many of the industry's old documents are housed in libraries, such as the one on the grounds of the first DuPont family home in Delaware. Others are with universities, where former industry leaders sent their records.
At Syracuse University, there are boxes of files from a former industry consultant. And inside one of them is a report written in April 1973 by scientists tasked with forecasting possible issues for top industry executives.
Recycling plastic, it told the executives, was unlikely to happen on a broad scale.
"There is no recovery from obsolete products," it says.
It says pointedly: Plastic degrades with each turnover.
"A degradation of resin properties and performance occurs during the initial fabrication, through aging, and in any reclamation process," the report told executives.
Recycling plastic is "costly," it says, and sorting it, the report concludes, is "infeasible."
And there are more documents, echoing decades of this knowledge, including one analysis from a top official at the industry's most powerful trade group. "The costs of separating plastics ... are high," he tells colleagues, before noting that the cost of using oil to make plastic is so low that recycling plastic waste "can't yet be justified economically."
Larry Thomas, the former president of the Society of the Plastics Industry, worked side by side with top oil and plastics executives.
He's retired now, on the coast of Florida where he likes to bike, and feels conflicted about the time he worked with the plastics industry.
"I did what the industry wanted me to do, that's for sure," he says. "But my personal views didn't always jibe with the views I had to take as part of my job."
Thomas took over back in the late 1980s, and back then, plastic was in a crisis. There was too much plastic trash. The public was getting upset.
Enlarge this image toggle caption Laura Sullivan/NPR Laura Sullivan/NPR
In one document from 1989, Thomas calls executives at Exxon, Chevron, Amoco, Dow, DuPont, Procter & Gamble and others to a private meeting at the Ritz-Carlton in Washington.
"The image of plastics is deteriorating at an alarming rate," he wrote. "We are approaching a point of no return."
He told the executives they needed to act.
The "viability of the industry and the profitability of your company" are at stake.
Thomas remembers now.
"The feeling was the plastics industry was under fire — we got to do what it takes to take the heat off, because we want to continue to make plastic products," he says.
At this time, Thomas had a co-worker named Lew Freeman. He was a vice president of the lobbying group. He remembers many of the meetings like the one in Washington.
"The basic question on the table was, You guys as our trade association in the plastics industry aren't doing enough — we need to do more," Freeman says. "I remember this is one of those exchanges that sticks with me 35 years later or however long it's been ... and it was what we need to do is ... advertise our way out of it. That was the idea thrown out."
So began the plastics industry's $50 million-a-year ad campaign promoting the benefits of plastic.
"Presenting the possibilities of plastic!" one iconic ad blared, showing kids in bike helmets and plastic bags floating in the air.
YouTube
"This advertising was motivated first and foremost by legislation and other initiatives that were being introduced in state legislatures and sometimes in Congress," Freeman says, "to ban or curb the use of plastics because of its performance in the waste stream."
At the same time, the industry launched a number of feel-good projects, telling the public to recycle plastic. It funded sorting machines, recycling centers, nonprofits, even expensive benches outside grocery stores made out of plastic bags.
Few of these projects actually turned much plastic into new things.
NPR tracked down almost a dozen projects the industry publicized starting in 1989. All of them shuttered or failed by the mid-1990s. Mobil's Massachusetts recycling facility lasted three years, for example. Amoco's project to recycle plastic in New York schools lasted two. Dow and Huntsman's highly publicized plan to recycle plastic in national parks made it to seven out of 419 parks before the companies cut funding.
None of them was able to get past the economics: Making new plastic out of oil is cheaper and easier than making it out of plastic trash.
Both Freeman and Thomas, the head of the lobbying group, say the executives all knew that.
"There was a lot of discussion about how difficult it was to recycle," Thomas remembers. "They knew that the infrastructure wasn't there to really have recycling amount to a whole lot."
Even as the ads played and the projects got underway, Thomas and Freeman say industry officials wanted to get recycling plastic into people's homes and outside on their curbs with blue bins.
The industry created a special group called the Council for Solid Waste Solutions and brought a man from DuPont, Ron Liesemer, over to run it.
Liesemer's job was to at least try to make recycling work — because there was some hope, he said, however unlikely, that maybe if they could get recycling started, somehow the economics of it all would work itself out.
"I had no staff, but I had money," Liesemer says. "Millions of dollars."
Liesemer took those millions out to Minnesota and other places to start local plastic recycling programs.
But then he ran into the same problem all the industry documents found. Recycling plastic wasn't making economic sense: There were too many different kinds of plastic, hundreds of them, and they can't be melted down together. They have to be sorted out.
"Yes, it can be done," Liesemer says, "but who's going to pay for it? Because it goes into too many applications, it goes into too many structures that just would not be practical to recycle."
Liesemer says he started as many programs as he could and hoped for the best.
"They were trying to keep their products on the shelves," Liesemer says. "That's what they were focused on. They weren't thinking what lesson should we learn for the next 20 years. No. Solve today's problem."
And Thomas, who led the trade group, says all of these efforts started to have an effect: The message that plastic could be recycled was sinking in.
"I can only say that after a while, the atmosphere seemed to change," he says. "I don't know whether it was because people thought recycling had solved the problem or whether they were so in love with plastic products that they were willing to overlook the environmental concerns that were mounting up."
But as the industry pushed those public strategies to get past the crisis, officials were also quietly launching a broader plan.
In the early 1990s, at a small recycling facility near San Diego, a man named Coy Smith was one of the first to see the industry's new initiative.
Back then, Smith ran a recycling business. His customers were watching the ads and wanted to recycle plastic. So Smith allowed people to put two plastic items in their bins: soda bottles and milk jugs. He lost money on them, he says, but the aluminum, paper and steel from his regular business helped offset the costs.
But then, one day, almost overnight, his customers started putting all kinds of plastic in their bins.
"The symbols start showing up on the containers," he explains.
Smith went out to the piles of plastic and started flipping over the containers. All of them were now stamped with the triangle of arrows — known as the international recycling symbol — with a number in the middle. He knew right away what was happening.
"All of a sudden, the consumer is looking at what's on their soda bottle and they're looking at what's on their yogurt tub, and they say, 'Oh well, they both have a symbol. Oh well, I guess they both go in,' " he says.
Enlarge this image toggle caption Laura Sullivan/NPR Laura Sullivan/NPR
The bins were now full of trash he couldn't sell. He called colleagues at recycling facilities all across the country. They reported having the same problem.
Industry documents from this time show that just a couple of years earlier, starting in 1989, oil and plastics executives began a quiet campaign to lobby almost 40 states to mandate that the symbol appear on all plastic — even if there was no way to economically recycle it. Some environmentalists also supported the symbol, thinking it would help separate plastic.
Smith said what it did was make all plastic look recyclable.
"The consumers were confused," Smith says. "It totally undermined our credibility, undermined what we knew was the truth in our community, not the truth from a lobbying group out of D.C."
But the lobbying group in D.C. knew the truth in Smith's community too. A report given to top officials at the Society of the Plastics Industry in 1993 told them about the problems.
"The code is being misused," it says bluntly. "Companies are using it as a 'green' marketing tool."
The code is creating "unrealistic expectations" about how much plastic can actually be recycled, it told them.
Smith and his colleagues launched a national protest, started a working group and fought the industry for years to get the symbol removed or changed. They lost.
"We don't have manpower to compete with this," Smith says. "We just don't. Even though we were all dedicated, it still was like, can we keep fighting a battle like this on and on and on from this massive industry that clearly has no end in sight of what they're able to do and willing to do to keep their image the image they want."
"It's pure manipulation of the consumer," he says.
In response, industry officials told NPR that the code was only ever meant to help recycling facilities sort plastic and was not intended to create any confusion.
Without question, plastic has been critical to the country's success. It's cheap and durable, and it's a chemical marvel.
It's also hugely profitable. The oil industry makes more than $400 billion a year making plastic, and as demand for oil for cars and trucks declines, the industry is telling shareholders that future profits will increasingly come from plastic.
And if there was a sign of this future, it's a brand-new chemical plant that rises from the flat skyline outside Sweeny, Texas. It's so new that it's still shiny, and inside the facility, the concrete is free from stains.
toggle caption Laura Sullivan/NPR
This plant is Chevron Phillips Chemical's $6 billion investment in new plastic.
"We see a very bright future for our products," says Jim Becker, the vice president of sustainability for Chevron Phillips, inside a pristine new warehouse next to the plant.
"These are products the world needs and continues to need," he says. "We're very optimistic about future growth."
With that growth, though, comes ever more plastic trash. But Becker says Chevron Phillips has a plan: It will recycle 100% of the plastic it makes by 2040.
Becker seems earnest. He tells a story about vacationing with his wife and being devastated by the plastic trash they saw. When asked how Chevron Phillips will recycle 100% of the plastic it makes, he doesn't hesitate.
"Recycling has to get more efficient, more economic," he says. "We've got to do a better job, collecting the waste, sorting it. That's going to be a huge effort."
Fix recycling is the industry's message too, says Steve Russell, the industry's recent spokesman.
"Fixing recycling is an imperative, and we've got to get it right," he says. "I understand there is doubt and cynicism. That's going to exist. But check back in. We're there."
Larry Thomas, Lew Freeman and Ron Liesemer, former industry executives, helped oil companies out of the first plastic crisis by getting people to believe something the industry knew then wasn't true: That most plastic could be and would be recycled.
Russell says this time will be different.
"It didn't get recycled because the system wasn't up to par," he says. "We hadn't invested in the ability to sort it and there hadn't been market signals that companies were willing to buy it, and both of those things exist today."
But plastic today is harder to sort than ever: There are more kinds of plastic, it's cheaper to make plastic out of oil than plastic trash and there is exponentially more of it than 30 years ago.
And during those 30 years, oil and plastic companies made billions of dollars in profit as the public consumed ever more quantities of plastic.
Russell doesn't dispute that.
"And during that time, our members have invested in developing the technologies that have brought us where we are today," he says. "We are going to be able to make all of our new plastic out of existing municipal solid waste in plastic."
Recently, an industry advocacy group funded by the nation's largest oil and plastic companies launched its most expensive effort yet to promote recycling and cleanup of plastic waste. There's even a new ad.
Enlarge this image toggle caption Laura Sullivan/NPR Laura Sullivan/NPR
"We have the people that can change the world," it says to soaring music as people pick up plastic trash and as bottles get sorted in a recycling center.
Freeman, the former industry official, recently watched the ad.
"Déjà vu all over again," he says as the ad finishes. "This is the same kind of thinking that ran in the '90s. I don't think this kind of advertising is, is helpful at all."
Larry Thomas said the same.
"I don't think anything has changed," Thomas says. "Sounds exactly the same."
These days as Thomas bikes down by the beach, he says he spends a lot of time thinking about the oceans and what will happen to them in 20 or 50 years, long after he is gone.
And as he thinks back to those years he spent in conference rooms with top executives from oil and plastic companies, what occurs to him now is something he says maybe should have been obvious all along.
He says what he saw was an industry that didn't want recycling to work. Because if the job is to sell as much oil as you possibly can, any amount of recycled plastic is competition.
"You know, they were not interested in putting any real money or effort into recycling because they wanted to sell virgin material," Thomas says. "Nobody that is producing a virgin product wants something to come along that is going to replace it. Produce more virgin material — that's their business."
And they are. Analysts now expect plastic production to triple by 2050.
Cat Schuknecht contributed to this report.


npr--2020-09-11--For Ex-FBI Interrogator Ali Soufan, Sept. 11 Still Frames His Life

For Ex-FBI Interrogator Ali Soufan , Sept. 11 Still Frames His Life The al-Qaida attacks on Sept. 11 , 2001 , may now seem like a distant memory for some .
But not for Ali Soufan , a former FBI agent who interrogated many al-Qaida suspects .
`` For me , it has the feeling that it just happened yesterday , '' Soufan told NPR in an interview .
He has good reasons for feeling that way .
This week , Soufan released a new version of his 2011 book , The Black Banners ( Declassified ) : How Torture @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , which now includes details of interrogations previously censored by the U.S. government .
And U.S. officials recently told Soufan that al-Qaida is plotting to kill him .
Soufan , 49 , has long argued that he got far more information out of al-Qaida suspects by building rapport with them than the CIA did by waterboarding them .
`` Let 's look at the truth and let 's expose those people who lied for a long period of time to the American public about waterboarding and the efficacy of torture , '' Soufan @ @ @ @ @ @ @ FBI approved Soufan 's book manuscript with only minor changes .
But the CIA then intervened and insisted that he redact large parts related to the agency 's harsh interrogations .
The CIA has now dropped its objections and Soufan is telling a more detailed story in the new version .
Consider the case of Abu Zubaydah , who was captured in Pakistan six months after the Sept. 11 attacks .
He was the first `` high-value detainee '' taken into custody after 9/11 .
He was badly injured in a shootout when @ @ @ @ @ @ @ to a U.S. `` black site '' in another country that has never been publicly identified .
Despite his condition , Abu Zubaydah cooperated with Soufan , an Arabic speaker who was born in Lebanon .
Over the course of several days , the detainee provided a critical piece of information by accident .
As Abu Zubaydah spoke , Soufan and an FBI colleague showed him photos of terrorist suspects on a hand-held device to determine if they were all referring to the same people .
Inadvertently , the FBI agents opened a @ @ @ @ @ @ @ was n't well known to the Americans .
Abu Zubaydah then dropped a bombshell , Soufan said : `` We did not even know that Khalid Sheikh Mohammad was a member of al-Qaida .
And now here 's Abu Zubaydah , telling us that Khalid Sheikh Mohammed is actually the mastermind of 9/11 . ''
Yet when CIA interrogators arrived shortly afterward , they stripped Abu Zubaydah naked , bombarded him with loud music and deprived him of sleep .
Cooperation largely ceased .
Abu Zubaydah was ultimately waterboarded 83 times .
`` @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , who were part of that failed program , were misleading the American public about the effectiveness of torture , '' said Soufan .
He said many CIA officers in the field opposed the harsh methods , while senior figures at agency headquarters were more likely to support them .
The CIA declined to comment for this story .
The agency has previously acknowledged what it calls `` mistakes '' and `` shortcomings '' in its interrogation program .
But it also said that `` enhanced interrogation techniques did produce valuable and unique @ @ @ @ @ @ @ capture terrorists and save lives . ''
The CIA said it halted the program in 2007 .
President Obama formally shut it down immediately after taking office in 2009 .
Those moves were further bolstered by a 2015 anti-torture law , sponsored by the late Sen. John McCain , who was tortured as a prisoner of war in Vietnam .
`` I know from personal experience , that the abuse of prisoners will produce more bad , than good intelligence , '' McCain said in 2014 .
Nearly two decades after the 9/11 @ @ @ @ @ @ @ unfinished business .
Like the legal fate of the 40 detainees still at the U.S. prison in Guantanamo Bay , Cuba .
Many are still awaiting trial , and lawyers are arguing about whether statements made during interrogations will be allowed in court .
`` Guantanamo is just a manifestation of the failure of the torture program , '' Soufan said .
`` You have mass murderers down there who admitted to killing more than 3,000 Americans , and we can not prosecute them .
They are just sitting there . ''
Al-Qaida @ @ @ @ @ @ @ But Soufan says they remain a threat .
And there 's one additional danger he 's monitoring — the al-Qaida threat against Ali Soufan .
U.S. officials informed Soufan in May that the terrorist group was plotting to attack him .
His company , the Soufan Group , launched its own investigation and found online threats against Soufan .
`` We started to see a major misinformation and intimidation campaign .
We were able to connect it to Saudi Arabia , '' he said .
The case is still under investigation .
Greg @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
Follow him @ gregmyre1 .

For Ex-FBI Interrogator Ali Soufan, Sept. 11 Still Frames His Life
Enlarge this image toggle caption Hector Retamal /AFP via Getty Images Hector Retamal /AFP via Getty Images
The al-Qaida attacks on Sept. 11, 2001, may now seem like a distant memory for some. But not for Ali Soufan, a former FBI agent who interrogated many al-Qaida suspects.
"For me, it has the feeling that it just happened yesterday," Soufan told NPR in an interview.
He has good reasons for feeling that way. This week, Soufan released a new version of his 2011 book, The Black Banners (Declassified): How Torture Derailed The War On Terror After 9/11, which now includes details of interrogations previously censored by the U.S. government.
And U.S. officials recently told Soufan that al-Qaida is plotting to kill him.
Soufan, 49, has long argued that he got far more information out of al-Qaida suspects by building rapport with them than the CIA did by waterboarding them.
"Let's look at the truth and let's expose those people who lied for a long period of time to the American public about waterboarding and the efficacy of torture," Soufan said.
Back in 2011, the FBI approved Soufan's book manuscript with only minor changes. But the CIA then intervened and insisted that he redact large parts related to the agency's harsh interrogations.
The CIA has now dropped its objections and Soufan is telling a more detailed story in the new version.
A critical revelation
Consider the case of Abu Zubaydah, who was captured in Pakistan six months after the Sept. 11 attacks. He was the first "high-value detainee" taken into custody after 9/11.
He was badly injured in a shootout when he was seized, and was flown to a U.S. "black site" in another country that has never been publicly identified.
Despite his condition, Abu Zubaydah cooperated with Soufan, an Arabic speaker who was born in Lebanon. Over the course of several days, the detainee provided a critical piece of information by accident.
As Abu Zubaydah spoke, Soufan and an FBI colleague showed him photos of terrorist suspects on a hand-held device to determine if they were all referring to the same people.
Inadvertently, the FBI agents opened a photo of Khalid Sheikh Mohammed, who wasn't well known to the Americans.
Abu Zubaydah then dropped a bombshell, Soufan said: "We did not even know that Khalid Sheikh Mohammad was a member of al-Qaida. And now here's Abu Zubaydah, telling us that Khalid Sheikh Mohammed is actually the mastermind of 9/11."
Yet when CIA interrogators arrived shortly afterward, they stripped Abu Zubaydah naked, bombarded him with loud music and deprived him of sleep. Cooperation largely ceased. Abu Zubaydah was ultimately waterboarded 83 times.
"A lot of people in the agency, who were part of that failed program, were misleading the American public about the effectiveness of torture," said Soufan.
He said many CIA officers in the field opposed the harsh methods, while senior figures at agency headquarters were more likely to support them.
The CIA declined to comment for this story. The agency has previously acknowledged what it calls "mistakes" and "shortcomings" in its interrogation program. But it also said that "enhanced interrogation techniques did produce valuable and unique intelligence that helped thwart attack plans, capture terrorists and save lives."
Enlarge this image toggle caption Manuel Balce Ceneta/AP Manuel Balce Ceneta/AP
Program is shutdown
The CIA said it halted the program in 2007. President Obama formally shut it down immediately after taking office in 2009. Those moves were further bolstered by a 2015 anti-torture law, sponsored by the late Sen. John McCain, who was tortured as a prisoner of war in Vietnam.
"I know from personal experience, that the abuse of prisoners will produce more bad, than good intelligence," McCain said in 2014.
Nearly two decades after the 9/11 attacks, Soufan says there's still unfinished business. Like the legal fate of the 40 detainees still at the U.S. prison in Guantanamo Bay, Cuba. Many are still awaiting trial, and lawyers are arguing about whether statements made during interrogations will be allowed in court.
"Guantanamo is just a manifestation of the failure of the torture program," Soufan said. "You have mass murderers down there who admitted to killing more than 3,000 Americans, and we cannot prosecute them. They are just sitting there."
Al-Qaida and ISIS have both been weakened. But Soufan says they remain a threat. And there's one additional danger he's monitoring — the al-Qaida threat against Ali Soufan.
U.S. officials informed Soufan in May that the terrorist group was plotting to attack him.
His company, the Soufan Group, launched its own investigation and found online threats against Soufan.
"We started to see a major misinformation and intimidation campaign. We were able to connect it to Saudi Arabia," he said.
The case is still under investigation.
Greg Myre is an NPR national security correspondent. Follow him @gregmyre1.


npr--2020-09-11--Hangover From Alcohol Boom Could Last Long After Pandemic Ends

Hangover From Alcohol Boom Could Last Long After Pandemic Ends When the coronavirus swept the country , a lot of things government did in response were controversial .
Politicians fought over mask wearing rules and quarantine restrictions .
But one policy , making sure Americans have ready access to alcohol , was truly bipartisan .
`` The state liquor authority is going to change its rules that will allow bars , restaurants and distilleries to sell their products off-premises , '' said New York Gov .
Andrew Cuomo in mid-March .
Florida 's Republican Gov .
Ron DeSantis followed suit @ @ @ @ @ @ @ bars and restaurants ] to deliver alcohol , I think that 's been pretty popular , we 're probably going to keep that going , '' he told reporters .
It worked .
While many bars and clubs faced new restrictions for dine-in customers , a lot of Americans still found ways to have a drink or two with friends .
Quarantine cocktail parties became a new thing online .
The pandemic also drove a surge in online sales using phone apps that connect consumers with local liquor stores for home delivery .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ days when lockdowns started getting put in place , we saw a pretty dramatic increase , '' said Liz Paquette with a company called Drizly that raised $ 50 million last month to expand operations .
Pacquette declined to say how many people use their app to arrange home alcohol deliveries , but said they 've seen a surge in new customers .
`` As we stand today we 're up around 350 % '' in sales over the same time last year , Paquette told NPR .
According to Nielsen 's market @ @ @ @ @ @ @ bars and restaurants have surged roughly 24 % during the pandemic .
They found sales of spirits with higher alcohol content rose even faster , a more than 27 % increase over last year .
It 's been an economic lifeline for many businesses , but healthcare experts caution there could be serious consequences for millions of Americans that linger long after COVID-19 has passed .
`` I get worried when people think about alcohol as a tool to unwind , a tool to cope with stress and anxiety , '' said Dr. @ @ @ @ @ @ @ National Institute of Alcohol Abuse and Alcoholism .
Leggio told NPR that for societal reasons alcohol feels less risky than other drugs — including opioids , meth and cocaine — that have also seen a surge in use during the pandemic .
For many people , a cocktail or a beer in the evening can be a normal and comforting part of their social lives .
But alcohol-related illnesses kill more than 88,0000 Americans each year , according to the NIAAA .
That 's more than all drug overdose deaths combined .
Leggio @ @ @ @ @ @ @ people will struggle with patterns of excessive drinking and addiction that start now while they 're isolating at home .
`` We know from previous traumatic events , Katrina and 9/11 , people who survived some of them developed alcohol use disorder relating to the increase in stress , '' he said .
Warning signs include a strong urge or need to drink , or if you drink more than you planned .
Then it may be time to talk to your doctor .
Most at risk are the roughly 15 million Americans @ @ @ @ @ @ @ suffer from alcohol use disorder .
`` I relapsed during the pandemic .
I picked up that first drink and I was scared , '' said Elizabeth Marshall , who is in recovery in Ogdensburg , New York .
As the coronavirus spread , therapy programs were canceled , leaving people who experience alcohol dependency isolated and scared .
`` It drove my depression , like , skyrocketed it , '' Marshall said .
`` It did n't make sense to me how they could shut down all of the places that are @ @ @ @ @ @ @ all the alcohol sales . ''
The surge of drinking during the pandemic comes at a time when Americans are already consuming more alcohol , a roughly 20 % increase that began in the 1990s .
The NIAA 's Leggio says these two trends together could leave more Americans vulnerable to the coronavirus .
`` People with excessive alcohol use have an increased risk of respiratory infections , '' Leggio noted .
`` They also have an increased risk of complications relating to respiratory infections . ''
The World Health Organization issued a @ @ @ @ @ @ @ to reconsider making alcohol widely available during the pandemic and to instead step up counseling and treatment opportunities .
`` During the COVID-19 pandemic , we should really ask ourselves what risks we are taking in leaving people under lockdown in their homes with [ alcohol ] , '' said Carina Ferreira-Borges with the WHO 's Alcohol and Illicit Drugs Programme in a statement .

Hangover From Alcohol Boom Could Last Long After Pandemic Ends
Enlarge this image toggle caption Angela Weiss/AFP via Getty Images Angela Weiss/AFP via Getty Images
When the coronavirus swept the country, a lot of things government did in response were controversial. Politicians fought over mask-wearing rules and quarantine restrictions.
But one policy, making sure Americans have ready access to alcohol, was truly bipartisan.
"The State Liquor Authority is going to change its rules that will allow bars, restaurants and distilleries to sell their products off-premises," said New York Gov. Andrew Cuomo, a Democrat, in mid-March.
Florida's Republican Gov. Ron DeSantis followed suit in May. "I allowed [bars and restaurants] to deliver alcohol, I think that's been pretty popular, we're probably going to keep that going," he told reporters.
Alcohol sales a bright spot in a troubled economy
It worked. While many bars and clubs faced new restrictions for dine-in customers, a lot of Americans still found ways to have a drink or two with friends. Quarantine cocktail parties became a new thing online.
The pandemic also drove a surge in online sales using phone apps that connect consumers with local liquor stores for home delivery.
"You know especially in the early days when lockdowns started getting put in place, we saw a pretty dramatic increase," said Liz Paquette with a company called Drizly that raised $50 million last month to expand operations.
Paquette declined to say how many people use the app to arrange home alcohol deliveries, but said the company has seen a surge in new customers. "As we stand today, we're up around 350%" in sales over the same time last year, Paquette told NPR.
According to Nielsen's market data, total alcohol sales outside of bars and restaurants have surged roughly 24% during the pandemic.
They found sales of spirits with higher alcohol content rose even faster, a more than 27% increase over last year.
Past traumatic events brought rise in alcohol dependency
It has been an economic lifeline for many businesses, but health care experts caution there could be serious consequences for millions of Americans that linger long after COVID-19 has passed.
"I get worried when people think about alcohol as a tool to unwind, a tool to cope with stress and anxiety," said Dr. Lorenzo Leggio, a researcher with the National Institute on Alcohol Abuse and Alcoholism.
Leggio told NPR that for societal reasons, alcohol feels less risky than other drugs — including opioids, meth and cocaine — that have also seen a surge in use during the pandemic.
For many people, a cocktail or a beer in the evening can be a normal and comforting part of their social lives.
But alcohol-related illnesses kill more than 88,000 Americans each year, according to the NIAAA. That's more than all drug overdose deaths combined.
Leggio worries that long after the pandemic passes, people will struggle with patterns of excessive drinking and addiction that start now while they're isolating at home.
"We know from previous traumatic events, Katrina and 9/11, people who survived some of them developed alcohol use disorder relating to the increase in stress," he said.
Warning signs include a strong urge or need to drink or drinking more than you planned. Then it may be time to talk to your doctor.
Enlarge this image toggle caption Brian Mann/NPR Brian Mann/NPR
Millions of Americans at higher risk
Most at risk are the roughly 15 million Americans estimated by the federal government to already suffer from alcohol use disorder.
"I relapsed during the pandemic. I picked up that first drink and I was scared," said Elizabeth Marshall, who is in recovery in Ogdensburg, N.Y.
As the coronavirus spread, therapy programs were canceled, leaving people who experience alcohol dependency isolated and scared.
"It drove my depression, like, skyrocketed it," Marshall said. "It didn't make sense to me how they could shut down all of the places that are trying to help and keeping going with all the alcohol sales."
The surge of drinking during the pandemic comes at a time when Americans are already consuming more alcohol, a roughly 20% increase that began in the 1990s.
The NIAAA's Leggio says these two trends could leave more Americans vulnerable to the coronavirus.
"People with excessive alcohol use have an increased risk of respiratory infections," Leggio noted. "They also have an increased risk of complications relating to respiratory infections."
The World Health Organization issued a similar warning this spring, urging governments to reconsider making alcohol widely available during the pandemic and to instead step up counseling and treatment opportunities.
"During the COVID-19 pandemic, we should really ask ourselves what risks we are taking in leaving people under lockdown in their homes with [alcohol]," said Carina Ferreira-Borges with the WHO's Alcohol and Illicit Drugs Programme in a statement.


npr--2020-09-10--Connecticut Police Chief Facing Fraud Charges For Allegedly Rigging His Own Hiring

Connecticut Police Chief Facing Fraud Charges For Allegedly Rigging His Own Hiring Federal authorities on Thursday arrested the police chief and the personnel director of Bridgeport , Conn. on charges of fraud , alleging the two rigged the process that led to the chief 's hiring in 2018 .
The FBI and Department of Justice said in a statement that the police chief , Armando Perez , and acting personnel director , David Dunn , are accused of manipulating the police chief examination to ensure Perez would be a finalist for the position , and making false statements to federal @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
`` As alleged , Chief Perez and Personnel Director Dunn schemed to rig the purportedly impartial and objective search for a permanent police chief to ensure the position was awarded to Perez , and then repeatedly lied to federal agents in order to conceal their conduct , '' said Acting U.S. Attorney Audrey Strauss .
Perez 's and Dunn 's attorneys did not immediately respond to requests for comment on Thursday evening , nor did the Bridgeport Police Department .
According to the criminal complaint , the city of Bridgeport — Connecticut @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the position of permanent chief of police in early 2018 .
The city 's charter requires it to hold an `` open and competitive examination , '' with the top three scoring candidates moving on to the mayor 's desk for selection .
At the time , Perez was serving as acting police chief , and Dunn was overseeing the examination process in his role as personnel director .
The complaint says that Dunn hired an outside consultant to assist with the development and administration of the exam , and worked together with @ @ @ @ @ @ @ multiple ways . ''
Specifically , Dunn is said to have stolen confidential exam questions and related information developed by the consultant and provided those materials to Perez , and had the consultant tailor the exam scoring criteria to favor Perez .
He also allegedly attempted to influence a panelist tasked with ranking the candidates in the final stage of the exam , in an effort to make sure Perez was among the top three .
Perez is accused of enlisting two police officers to `` secretly draft and write '' his written @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the scheme , the City was deceived into ranking Perez among the top three candidates , which rendered him eligible for the permanent police chief position , '' officials said .
The mayor ultimately offered the position to Perez , who entered into a five-year contract whose terms included a payout of more than $ 300,000 for accrued leave .
Authorities also said Perez and Dunn were voluntarily interviewed as part of the FBI 's investigation , and each lied to agents during that process .
For example , they said , Perez @ @ @ @ @ @ @ assistance he received , including regarding `` his requests to a BPD officer to sneak into headquarters to retrieve stolen confidential information provided by Dunn . ''
Perez and Dunn are each charged with one count of wire fraud and one count of conspiracy to commit wire fraud , charges that each carry a maximum penalty of 20 years in prison .
Perez is also charged with two counts of false statements to federal investigators and Dunn is charged with one .
`` Today 's arrest of city officials including a high ranking @ @ @ @ @ @ @ stark reminder that the betrayal of public trust and community members by a public servant is not only unethical but often illegal , '' said FBI Special Agent-in-Charge David Sundberg .
In a video message on Thursday , Bridgeport Mayor Joe Ganim said Perez had resigned and that Assistant Chief Rebeca Garcia will take leadership of the department as acting chief .
Ganim said that his administration learned `` in real time '' Thursday morning that the two city officials had turned themselves into the U.S. Attorney 's Office .
`` Certainly there @ @ @ @ @ @ @ answers as to what has happened , disappointment , uncertainty , '' Ganim said .
`` But I can tell you this : Members of this administration remain committed to you , as residents of this city ... committed to public safety as a top priority and we 'll keep you advised as we move forward on this . ''

Connecticut Police Chief Faces Fraud Charges On Allegations He Rigged His Own Hiring
Enlarge this image toggle caption Jessica Hill/AP Jessica Hill/AP
Federal authorities on Thursday arrested the police chief and the personnel director of Bridgeport, Conn., on charges of fraud, alleging the two rigged the process that led to the chief's hiring in 2018.
The FBI and Department of Justice said in a statement that the police chief, Armando Perez, and acting personnel director, David Dunn, are accused of manipulating the police chief examination to ensure Perez would be a finalist for the position and of making false statements to federal agents in the course of their investigation.
"As alleged, Chief Perez and Personnel Director Dunn schemed to rig the purportedly impartial and objective search for a permanent police chief to ensure the position was awarded to Perez, and then repeatedly lied to federal agents in order to conceal their conduct," said Acting U.S. Attorney Audrey Strauss.
Perez's and Dunn's attorneys did not immediately respond to requests for comment on Thursday evening, nor did the Bridgeport Police Department.
According to the criminal complaint, the city of Bridgeport — Connecticut's largest — set out to fill the position of permanent chief of police in early 2018.
The city's charter requires it to hold an "open and competitive examination," with the top three scoring candidates moving on to the mayor's desk for selection. At the time, Perez was serving as acting police chief and Dunn was overseeing the examination process in his role as personnel director.
The complaint says that Dunn hired an outside consultant to assist with the development and administration of the exam and worked with Perez to manipulate that process "in multiple ways."
Specifically, Dunn is said to have stolen confidential exam questions and related information developed by the consultant and provided those materials to Perez. Dunn also had the consultant tailor the exam scoring criteria to favor Perez. He also allegedly attempted to influence a panelist tasked with ranking the candidates in the final stage of the exam, in an effort to make sure Perez was among the top three.
Perez is accused of enlisting two police officers to "secretly draft and write" his written exam.
"As a result of the scheme, the City was deceived into ranking Perez among the top three candidates, which rendered him eligible for the permanent police chief position," officials said.
The mayor ultimately offered the position to Perez, who entered into a five-year contract whose terms included a payout of more than $300,000 for accrued leave.
Authorities also said Perez and Dunn were voluntarily interviewed as part of the FBI's investigation, and each lied to agents during that process. For example, they said, Perez provided false and misleading information about the assistance he received, including regarding "his requests to a BPD officer to sneak into headquarters to retrieve stolen confidential information provided by Dunn."
Perez and Dunn are each charged with one count of wire fraud and one count of conspiracy to commit wire fraud, charges that each carry a maximum penalty of 20 years in prison. Perez is also charged with two counts of false statements to federal investigators, and Dunn is charged with one.
"Today's arrest of city officials including a high-ranking, long-time law enforcement officer is a stark reminder that the betrayal of public trust and community members by a public servant is not only unethical but often illegal," said FBI Special Agent in Charge David Sundberg.
In a video message on Thursday, Bridgeport Mayor Joe Ganim said that Perez had resigned and that Assistant Chief Rebeca Garcia will take leadership of the department as acting chief.
Ganim said that his administration learned "in real time" Thursday morning that the two city officials had turned themselves into the U.S. Attorney's Office.
"Certainly there is a grappling for some of the answers as to what has happened, disappointment, uncertainty," Ganim said. "But I can tell you this: Members of this administration remain committed to you, as residents of this city ... committed to public safety as a top priority and we'll keep you advised as we move forward on this."


npr--2020-09-10--Fortnite Maker Tim Sweeney On Apple and Google: 'These Monopolies Need To Be Stopped'

Fortnite Maker Tim Sweeney On Apple and Google : 'These Monopolies Need To Be Stopped' From his perch in Cary , North Carolina , Epic Games CEO Tim Sweeney has launched a war against Silicon Valley powerhouses Apple and Google .
The billionaire maker of video game phenomenon Fortnite dragged the tech giants to court last month over the 30 % fee they charge on purchases made in their mobile app stores .
Since then , Sweeney , an iconoclastic executive who owns enormous farms and dabbles in fast cars , has not talked publicly about his decision .
He @ @ @ @ @ @ @ he had the backing of countless other app developers who also believe the tech titans are taking advantage of them .
`` It 's not just Epic being exploited by Apple , but it 's every developer who goes along with that scheme colluding with Apple and Google to further their monopoly , '' Sweeney said in the interview .
`` These stores are making a lot more money from creative works than the creators . ''
In some ways , Sweeney said , being far away from the orbit of Silicon Valley @ @ @ @ @ @ @ of `` groupthink , '' has made his gamble easier .
He said many companies either rely too much on the tech giants to help them distribute their products and reach consumers , or dream of becoming the next Apple or Google themselves .
`` Everybody does n't have a great incentive to challenge Apple and Google 's 30 % because they want to be the next bastard to charge 30 % , '' Sweeney said .
To be clear , Apple and Google object to Sweeney 's characterization .
They have long @ @ @ @ @ @ @ purchases .
The companies say the commission supports technical staff who make sure apps on iPhones and Androids are safe and secure .
In response , Sweeney , a veteran computer programmer , says that justification is offensive .
`` Every Apple engineer who works on these services and ensures that iPhone is the most secure platform in the world has got to deeply resent the business guys for taking credit and claiming that their store monopoly is the reason why the platform is secure , '' Sweeney said .
`` It 's @ @ @ @ @ @ @ latest legal filing , Apple says Sweeney is positioning his company as a `` modern corporate Robin Hood , in reality , it is a multi-billion dollar enterprise that simply wants to pay nothing . ''
Apple readily points out that Sweeney chose to break the rules that govern the app store — rules that clearly state developers can not make users pay in-app purchases .
Before Sweeney did that , leading to Apple 's tossing Fortnite out of its store , he wrote an email at 2 a.m. to tech executives including @ @ @ @ @ @ @ what Epic was about to do , according to court documents .
`` We choose to follow this path in the firm belief that history and law are on our side , '' he wrote in the email .
Trying to enlist 350 million players against Apple and Google Indeed , Fortnite is one of the most successful video games in the world , a bloodless fantasy free-for-all battle where players choose creative outfits , and even show off dance moves , on a secluded virtual island .
The game has more than @ @ @ @ @ @ @ it is quickly expanding into non-game events .
Hip-hop superstar Travis Scott held a concert on Fortnite .
The event drew more than 27 million users .
Epic Games has tried to rally Fortnite fans around its fight against Apple and Google , even going so far as to make a parody video portraying Apple as a greedy villain , and encouraging people to use the hashtag # FreeFortnite on social media .
Yet not all avid players are rallying around Sweeney 's cause .
Some , like Chelsea Nicole Sermons , 25 @ @ @ @ @ @ @ but the legal saga .
Sermons says after she finishes work as a customer service representative for a hospital-supply company , she plays Fortnite for at least four hours at a time , often live-streaming her sessions on her Twitch page .
Now , she says , many of her friends ca n't join in because they use the mobile app .
`` I had quite a few people that were really sad that they could n't play with me anymore , '' Sermons said .
`` Some of those people ca n't @ @ @ @ @ @ @ 400 console , or a $ 1,000 PC . ''
Sweeney : 'these monopolies need to be stopped' Regulators in Washington and Europe are investigating the app-store fees as a possible antitrust problem .
Apple and Google do not assess a fee on their own apps , which compete alongside third-party apps in a marketplace controlled by the tech giants .
Epic Games is not the only company to take issue with the arrangement .
Streaming service Spotify and software company Basecamp also have accused Apple and Google of abusing their power by @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Some critics have likened the commission to an unfair tax .
While the pressure on Apple and Google did not prompt Sweeney 's lawsuits , he says the harsh scrutiny on the companies undoubtedly provides a fitting backdrop .
`` It 's not that Epic looked at articles about investigations of these companies and decided that now 's the time to act .
It 's the same bad behavior by Apple and Google that 's driving everybody to the common conclusion that these monopolies need to be stopped , '' Sweeney said .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ about protecting Epic Games ' own driven as much by protecting Epic Games ' bottom line as it is attempting to rein in the power and reach of the tech titans .
A 30 % fee on new technologies in the future , Sweeney says , can stifle innovation .
And more than that , `` it 's going to be one of the worst dystopias you can imagine from the science fiction literature with a few corporations controlling not just digital items and games but everything , '' he said .
But @ @ @ @ @ @ @ with Apple and refused to order the tech company to relist Fortnite in the Apple app store , saying , `` the current predicament appears of its own making . ''
A full hearing on the issue is scheduled for Sept. 28 .
Selling Ferraris to buy thousands of acres of land Sweeney founded Epic Games in his parents ' basement in the suburbs of Washington , D.C. in the early 1990s and grew the business into a $ 17 billion gaming empire .
Along the way , he developed a fondness for @ @ @ @ @ @ @ and Ferraris , but has since given most of them up .
He does , however , still have a convertible Corvette .
`` Which is an awesome car , '' Sweeney said .
`` As much car as I need . ''
In recent years , though , he has chosen to spend his money elsewhere .
He 's purchased thousands of acres of land in North Carolina stretching out to the Blue Ridge Mountains .
By some estimates , Sweeney is one of the largest private landowners in the state .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ of a Ferrari to the cost of acres of land , you realize that a Ferrari is about 100 acres of some really prime land that can be conserved in North Carolina and Ferraris seem like a pretty inexpedient use of money at that point , '' Sweeney said .
When he is not studying flowers or salamanders out in nature , Sweeney has been watching developments from the court in his legal row with Apple and Google .
And sometimes , he logs onto Fortnite .
He has played 1,600 multiplayer matches @ @ @ @ @ @ @ I have a name that nobody knows .
I just go play randomly with groups of people and they have no idea who I am and we just have a good time together .
I primarily play as the Jelly Skin , '' said Sweeney , referring to the outfit , or `` skin , '' players on Fortnite choose .
`` It looks super comedic .
People expect the Jelly character to be really bad , '' Sweeney said .
`` And I 'm actually OK .
So it leads to some @ @ @ @

Fortnite Fight: CEO Explains Why He Launched War Against Apple, Google
Enlarge this image toggle caption Rachel Luna/Getty Images Rachel Luna/Getty Images
From his perch in Cary, N.C., Epic Games CEO Tim Sweeney has launched a war against Silicon Valley powerhouses Apple and Google.
The billionaire maker of the video game phenomenon Fortnite dragged the tech giants to court last month over the 30% fee they charge on purchases made in their mobile app stores.
Since then, Sweeney, an iconoclastic executive who owns enormous farms and dabbles in fast cars, has not talked publicly about his decision. He broke his silence to NPR, insisting he had the backing of countless other app developers who also believe the tech titans are taking advantage of them.
"It's not just Epic being exploited by Apple, but it's every developer who goes along with that scheme colluding with Apple and Google to further their monopoly," Sweeney said in the interview. "These stores are making a lot more money from creative works than the creators."
In some ways, Sweeney said, being far away from the orbit of Silicon Valley, a culture he has long accused of "groupthink," has made his gamble easier.
He said many companies either rely too much on the tech giants to help them distribute their products and reach consumers, or dream of becoming the next Apple or Google themselves.
"Everybody doesn't have a great incentive to challenge Apple and Google's 30% because they want to be the next bastard to charge 30%," Sweeney said.
To be clear, Apple and Google object to Sweeney's characterization. They have long charged the 30% fee for in-app purchases. The companies say the commission supports technical staff who make sure apps on iPhones and Androids are safe and secure.
In response, Sweeney, a veteran computer programmer, says that justification is offensive.
"Every Apple engineer who works on these services and ensures that iPhone is the most secure platform in the world has got to deeply resent the business guys for taking credit and claiming that their store monopoly is the reason why the platform is secure," Sweeney said. "It's just not true."
In its latest legal filing, Apple says Sweeney is positioning his company as a "modern corporate Robin Hood, in reality, it is a multi-billion-dollar enterprise that simply wants to pay nothing."
Apple readily points out that Sweeney chose to break the rules that govern the app store — rules that clearly state developers cannot make users pay for in-app purchases. Before Sweeney did that, leading to Apple's tossing Fortnite out of its store, he wrote an email at 2 a.m. to tech executives including Apple CEO Tim Cook. He detailed what Epic was about to do, according to court documents.
"We choose to follow this path in the firm belief that history and law are on our side," he wrote in the email.
Trying to enlist 350 million players against Apple and Google
Indeed, Fortnite is one of the most successful video games in the world, a bloodless fantasy free-for-all battle where players choose creative outfits, and even show off dance moves, on a secluded virtual island. The game has more than 350 million registered players worldwide, and it is quickly expanding into nongame events. Hip-hop superstar Travis Scott held a set of concerts on Fortnite, drawing more than 27 million users.
Epic Games has tried to rally Fortnite fans around its fight against Apple and Google, even going so far as to make a parody video portraying Apple as a greedy villain and encouraging people to use the hashtag #FreeFortnite on social media.
Yet not all avid players are rallying around Sweeney's cause. Some, like Chelsea Nicole Sermons, 25, of Tampa, Fla., are irked by the legal saga.
Sermons says after she finishes work as a customer service representative for a hospital-supply company, she plays Fortnite for at least four hours at a time, often livestreaming her sessions on her Twitch page. Now, she says, many of her friends can't join in because they use the mobile app.
"I had quite a few people that were really sad that they couldn't play with me anymore," Sermons said. "Some of those people can't afford to spend money on a $400 console, or a $1,000 PC."
Sweeney: 'These monopolies need to be stopped'
Regulators in Washington and Europe are investigating the app store fees as a possible antitrust problem. Apple and Google do not assess a fee on their own apps, which compete with third-party apps in a marketplace controlled by the tech giants.
Epic Games is not the only company to take issue with the arrangement. Streaming service Spotify and software company Basecamp also have accused Apple and Google of abusing their power by selectively charging the 30% fee. Some critics have likened the commission to an unfair tax.
While the pressure on Apple and Google did not prompt Sweeney's lawsuits, he says the harsh scrutiny on the companies undoubtedly provides a fitting backdrop.
"It's not that Epic looked at articles about investigations of these companies and decided that now's the time to act. It's the same bad behavior by Apple and Google that's driving everybody to the common conclusion that these monopolies need to be stopped," Sweeney said.
But Sweeney's crusade is driven as much by protecting Epic Games' bottom line as it is by attempting to rein in the power and reach of the tech titans.
A 30% fee on new technologies in the future, Sweeney says, can stifle innovation. And more than that, "it's going to be one of the worst dystopias you can imagine from the science fiction literature with a few corporations controlling not just digital items and games but everything," he said.
But last month, a federal judge sided with Apple and refused to order the tech company to relist Fortnite in the Apple app store, saying, "The current predicament appears of its own making."
A full hearing on the issue is scheduled for Sept. 28.
Selling Ferraris to buy thousands of acres of land
Sweeney founded Epic Games in his parents' basement in the suburbs of Washington, D.C., in the early 1990s and grew the business into a $17 billion gaming empire.
Along the way, he developed a fondness for fast cars. He once collected Lamborghinis and Ferraris, but has since given most of them up. He does, however, still have a convertible Corvette.
"Which is an awesome car," Sweeney said. "As much car as I need."
In recent years, though, he has chosen to spend his money elsewhere.
He has purchased thousands of acres of land in North Carolina stretching out to the Blue Ridge Mountains. By some estimates, Sweeney is one of the largest private landowners in the state.
"Once you start comparing the cost of a Ferrari to the cost of acres of land, you realize that a Ferrari is about 100 acres of some really prime land that can be conserved in North Carolina and Ferraris seem like a pretty inexpedient use of money at that point," Sweeney said.
When he is not studying flowers or salamanders out in nature, Sweeney has been watching developments from the court in his legal row with Apple and Google.
And sometimes, he logs onto Fortnite. He has played 1,600 multiplayer matches incognito, he told NPR.
"I have a name that nobody knows. I just go play randomly with groups of people and they have no idea who I am and we just have a good time together. I primarily play as the Jelly Skin," said Sweeney, referring to the outfit, or "skin," players on Fortnite choose.
"It looks super comedic. People expect the Jelly character to be really bad," Sweeney said. "And I'm actually OK. So it leads to some interesting interactions."


npr--2020-09-11--9 Protesters Confronted By Gun-Waving St. Louis Couple Get Trespassing Citations

Nine Black Lives Matter protesters who were confronted by a white St. Louis couple waving an AR 15-style rifle and a semi-automatic pistol as they allegedly stood guard on the beautifully manicured lawn of their mansion , have been issued trespassing summonses for marching onto a private property .
The St. Louis Metropolitan Police Department issued the citations after more than two months of investigations , and these are now under review by the city counselor 's office , officials told NPR .
The bizarre and potentially dangerous standoff made national headlines in June , catapulting the wealthy couple into @ @ @ @ @ @ @ 's political leanings — and stoked partisan debate over the rights and protections of protesters versus those of Second Amendment supporters .
It also landed Mark and Patricia McCloskey a spot in the Republican National Convention , even as they face felony charges from the St. Louis circuit attorney 's office .
Videos of the confrontation show Black Lives Matter protesters , who were marching toward Mayor Lyda Krewson 's nearby house , shouting at the pair — both attorneys — to put away their guns .
Patricia McCloskey can be seen with @ @ @ @ @ @ @ waved the gun at demonstrators .
Mark McCloskey clutches a long-barreled gun and can be heard shouting , `` Get the hell out of my neighborhood . ''
Protesters paraded through the ritzy enclave , calling for Krewson 's resignation for releasing the names and addresses of residents who suggested defunding the police department .
The couple has repeatedly said they feared for their lives and were only trying to protect their home .
On several occasions they described the protesters as criminals and during their RNC appearance said , `` They want @ @ @ @ @ @ @ '' The specifics of the alleged infractions by the protesters are unclear .
Early reports said the McCloskeys alleged that protesters had broken a gate to enter the wealthy community .
But police officials on Friday did not disclose whether that is among the charges .
St. Louis Metropolitan Police spokeswoman Evita Caldwell said in an email that the summonses `` are closed at this time . ''
Caldwell did not indicate whether additional citations will be issued in the future .
Neither did she explain the criteria the department used to identify @ @ @ @ @ @ @ about 300 participated in the march on June 28 .
City Counselor Julian Bush told NPR his office received the citations earlier this week .
`` It 's now incumbent on the city counselor to decide whether or not to charge these people , '' Bush said .
He expects it 'll take his office about two weeks to go through the documentation provided by the police department .
`` We have to assess whether or not it 's likely that a conviction could be obtained .
If there 's no probable cause @ @ @ @ @ @ @ interest '' of the community , then the city counselor will not prosecute , he said .
If his office does move ahead with prosecution , the protesters could face a fine of up to $ 500 , incarceration up to 90 days or probation .
But Bush added , `` It 's very , very rare for anyone to receive a penalty of incarceration for a municipal ordinance violation . ''
On Sept. 4 , Black Lives Matter activist Ohun Ashe posted on Twitter that she had received a summons from the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ sent a summons to appear in court for 'trespassing on private property ' on Portland Pl aka the street Patricia and Mark McCloskey live on , '' she wrote .
`` I had a gun waved in my face by them but trespassing is what matters ? ''
she added .
In July , Circuit Attorney Kimberly Gardner recommended `` that the McCloskeys participate in one of my office 's diversion programs . ''
And Missouri Gov .
Mike Parson said he would likely pardon the couple if they were charged .

9 Protesters Confronted By Gun-Waving St. Louis Couple Get Trespassing Citations
Enlarge this image toggle caption Laurie Skrivan/St. Louis Post-Dispatch/Tribune News Service via Getty Images Laurie Skrivan/St. Louis Post-Dispatch/Tribune News Service via Getty Images
Nine Black Lives Matter protesters who were confronted by a white St. Louis couple waving an AR 15-style rifle and a semi-automatic pistol as they allegedly stood guard on the beautifully manicured lawn of their mansion, have been issued trespassing summonses for marching onto a private property.
The St. Louis Metropolitan Police Department issued the citations after more than two months of investigations, and these are now under review by the city counselor's office, officials told NPR.
The bizarre and potentially dangerous standoff made national headlines in June, catapulting the wealthy couple into fame and infamy — depending on one's political leanings — and stoked partisan debate over the rights and protections of protesters versus those of Second Amendment supporters.
It also landed Mark and Patricia McCloskey a spot in the Republican National Convention, even as they face felony charges from the St. Louis circuit attorney's office.
Videos of the confrontation show Black Lives Matter protesters, who were marching toward Mayor Lyda Krewson's nearby house, shouting at the pair — both attorneys — to put away their guns.
Patricia McCloskey can be seen with her finger on the trigger as she waved the gun at demonstrators. Mark McCloskey clutches a long-barreled gun and can be heard shouting, "Get the hell out of my neighborhood."
Protesters paraded through the ritzy enclave, calling for Krewson's resignation for releasing the names and addresses of residents who suggested defunding the police department.
The couple has repeatedly said they feared for their lives and were only trying to protect their home. On several occasions they described the protesters as criminals and during their RNC appearance said, "They want to walk the halls of Congress."
The specifics of the alleged infractions by the protesters are unclear. Early reports said the McCloskeys alleged that protesters had broken a gate to enter the wealthy community. But police officials on Friday did not disclose whether that is among the charges.
St. Louis Metropolitan Police spokeswoman Evita Caldwell said in an email that the summonses "are closed at this time."
Caldwell did not indicate whether additional citations will be issued in the future. Neither did she explain the criteria the department used to identify and ticket the nine protesters, when about 300 participated in the march on June 28.
City Counselor Julian Bush told NPR his office received the citations earlier this week.
"It's now incumbent on the city counselor to decide whether or not to charge these people," Bush said.
He expects it'll take his office about two weeks to go through the documentation provided by the police department.
"We have to assess whether or not it's likely that a conviction could be obtained. If there's no probable cause or it's not in the broader interest" of the community, then the city counselor will not prosecute, he said.
If his office does move ahead with prosecution, the protesters could face a fine of up to $500, incarceration up to 90 days or probation. But Bush added, "It's very, very rare for anyone to receive a penalty of incarceration for a municipal ordinance violation."
On Sept. 4, Black Lives Matter activist Ohun Ashe posted on Twitter that she had received a summons from the police department.
"I was just sent a summons to appear in court for 'trespassing on private property' on Portland Pl aka the street Patricia and Mark McCloskey live on," she wrote.
"I had a gun waved in my face by them but trespassing is what matters?" she added.
In July, Circuit Attorney Kimberly Gardner recommended "that the McCloskeys participate in one of my office's diversion programs." And Missouri Gov. Mike Parson said he would likely pardon the couple if they were charged.


npr--2020-09-11--Adults With COVID-19 Twice As Likely To Have Eaten At Restaurants, CDC Study Finds

Adults With COVID-19 Twice As Likely To Have Eaten At Restaurants , CDC Study Finds Adults who tested positive for the coronavirus were about twice as likely to have dined at a restaurant within a two-week period prior to becoming sick , according to a new study from Centers For Disease Control and Prevention .
The study included 314 adults who had showed symptoms of COVID-19 and had sought testing at one 11 facilities across 10 states in July .
Of the participants , 154 tested positive for COVID-19 , while 160 tested negative and served as a control group @ @ @ @ @ @ @ including how often they had worn face coverings in public and where they had gone two weeks prior to having shown symptoms .
Seventy-one percent of people who tested positive said they had always worn face coverings in public , as opposed to 74 % of the control group .
The study found that both positive and negative cases reported going to gyms , hair salons , shops and in-home group gatherings at about the same rate .
But the positive cases were about twice as likely to report dining out at restaurants @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
`` Masks can not be effectively worn while eating and drinking , whereas shopping and numerous other indoor activities do not preclude mask use , '' researchers wrote .
The study also points out that many reported cases tied to restaurants have been linked to air circulation .
`` Direction , ventilation , and intensity of airflow might affect virus transmission , even if social distancing measures and mask use are implemented according to current guidance , '' the CDC notes .
Those who tested positive were more likely to have been @ @ @ @ @ @ @ have COVID-19 – 42 % compared to 14 % of the control group .
Of those close contacts , 51 % were family members .
Though the study has limitations — including its size and the fact that participants were n't asked to distinguish between indoor or outdoor dining — it echoes concerns over safety in bars and restaurants during the pandemic .
Many states have imposed restrictions on reopened restaurants .
CDC researchers recommend continued assessments of the risks of various activities especially as more schools , communities and workplaces reopen .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ to SARS-CoV-2 during on-site eating and drinking should be considered to protect customers , employees , and communities and slow the spread of COVID-19 , '' the CDC researchers wrote .

Adults With COVID-19 Twice As Likely To Have Eaten At Restaurants, CDC Study Finds
Enlarge this image toggle caption Spencer Platt/Getty Images Spencer Platt/Getty Images
Adults who tested positive for the coronavirus were about twice as likely to have dined at a restaurant within a two-week period prior to becoming sick, according to a new study from Centers For Disease Control and Prevention.
The study looked at 314 adults who had showed symptoms of COVID-19 and had sought testing at one of 11 facilities across 10 states in July. Of the participants, 154 tested positive for COVID-19, while 160 tested negative and served as a control group.
Participants were asked questions such as how often they had worn face coverings in public and where they had gone two weeks prior to having shown symptoms.
Seventy-one percent of people who tested positive said they had always worn face coverings in public, compared with 74% of the control group.
The study found that both positive and negative cases reported going to gyms, hair salons, shops and in-home group gatherings at about the same rate. But the positive cases were about twice as likely to report dining out at restaurants within the 14-day period before feeling sick.
"Masks cannot be effectively worn while eating and drinking, whereas shopping and numerous other indoor activities do not preclude mask use," researchers wrote.
The study also points out that many reported cases tied to restaurants have been linked to air circulation.
"Direction, ventilation, and intensity of airflow might affect virus transmission, even if social distancing measures and mask use are implemented according to current guidance," the CDC notes.
Those who tested positive were more likely to have been in close contact with someone known to have COVID-19 — 42% compared with 14% of the control group. Of those close contacts, 51% were family members.
Though the study has limitations — including its size and the fact that participants weren't asked to distinguish between indoor or outdoor dining — it echoes concerns over safety in bars and restaurants during the pandemic. Many states have imposed restrictions on reopened restaurants.
CDC researchers recommend continued assessments of the risks of various activities especially as more schools, communities and workplaces reopen.
"Implementing safe practices to reduce exposures to SARS-CoV-2 during on-site eating and drinking should be considered to protect customers, employees, and communities and slow the spread of COVID-19," the CDC researchers wrote.