admin
November 26, 2025
Aakriti Bansal, Medianama
November 26, 2025
MediaNama’s Take: The Central Consumer Protection Authority’s (CCPA) decision to publish 18 self-declarations confirms only a partial picture of its dark pattern(s) identifying exercise. The authority has stated that 26 platforms have filed their declarations, but it has made only 18 of them public. This gap means the public still cannot see what eight major platforms submitted or whether those filings contain any meaningful detail. Moreover, even among the published declarations, several are one-paragraph statements that offer almost no insight into the scope or accuracy of the companies’ internal audits.
LocalCircles’ new survey adds further complications, reporting that 21 of the 26 platforms that submitted declarations still display at least one dark pattern. This finding suggests that the CCPA’s reliance on voluntary self-assessment may not be enough to shift platform behaviour at scale. It also raises questions about what the unpublished declarations contain and whether the missing submissions are similarly sparse or incomplete.
Notably, the CCPA has not clarified how it plans to verify the accuracy of any of the declarations, whether published or unpublished. If filings remain unverified for months, compliance risks turning into a box-ticking exercise rather than a meaningful regulatory process. Therefore, the next phase matters far more than the publication of select declarations, because the current approach raises more questions than it answers.
What’s the News
The CCPA has made 18 dark pattern self-declarations public, despite stating that 26 platforms have filed their compliance letters. The publication follows an RTI filed by MediaNama that revealed which companies had submitted their declarations, and pointed out that none of the filings had been available to the public at the time.
These declarations stem from the Ministry’s June 5 advisory, which required e-commerce and quick commerce companies to conduct internal audits under the 2023 Guidelines for Prevention and Regulation of Dark Patterns and submit compliance letters within 90 days.
For context, Moneycontrol reported that Amazon has still not filed its declaration and has asked for additional time. A senior government official told the publication that the government “has done what it had to” and does not plan further discussions.
The official also said that any punitive action would depend on consumer complaints routed through channels such as the national consumer helpline. This indicates that the enforcement approach continues to be reactive rather than compliance-driven.
What Did The CCPA Ask Platforms To Do?
The June 5 advisory set out a simple compliance framework for digital platforms. It asked every e-commerce and quick commerce company to complete a self-audit of its website and mobile app within 90 days and check their interfaces for the 13 dark patterns listed in the 2023 guidelines. Platforms were required to file a self-declaration confirming compliance once this internal review was complete.
However, the advisory did not specify how the audit should be conducted. Companies were free to choose any methodology, and the CCPA did not prescribe a standard format, a uniform checklist, or a minimum evidence requirement. Also, the advisory did not require independent audits or third-party validation.
Furthermore, there was no explanation of how the CCPA planned to verify whether the declarations were accurate or complete. In effect, the responsibility for defining the scope, depth, and rigour of the audit rested entirely with each platform.
What the CCPA Has Done With the Declarations
As mentioned before, the CCPA has now published 18 self-declarations on its website. The release confirms that companies submitted their compliance letters, but it does not indicate whether the authority evaluated the accuracy or depth of the filings.
Several platforms submitted very short statements that simply assert compliance without describing any checks or findings. BigBasket, Zomato, Blinkit and Swiggy were among the companies that filed especially minimal disclosures. The CCPA has not explained why these filings were accepted or whether any follow-up questions were asked. Therefore, asking for and disclosing self-declarations shows some administrative progress, but it does not reflect any regulatory scrutiny.
This lack of verification aligns with concerns raised by Devangshu Dutta, Founder of business consulting firm Third Eyesight. He told MediaNama that self-declarations “do not change things much” when regulators do not audit submissions or impose consequences.
Further, Dutta remarked that most companies comply at the minimum level required if their claims are not examined and are not made public in full. According to him, revenue-driving design choices such as forced add-ons, confusing checkout flows or misleading scarcity claims will not be voluntarily removed sans oversight.
What Independent Evidence Shows
LocalCircles’ latest audit presents a sharply different picture from the companies’ filings. The organisation found that 21 of the 26 platforms that submitted “dark pattern free” declarations still use one or more manipulative design practices. The assessment relied on feedback from more than 250,000 consumers across 392 districts along with AI-assisted testing.
The most common violations include forced action, subscription traps, bait and switch, basket sneaking, interface interference and disguised advertisements. In practice, these dark patterns respectively mean that users are pushed into steps they did not choose, face hidden or hard-to-cancel subscriptions, see offers change during checkout, encounter fees added at the last moment, get nudged toward platform-favoured choices, and come across ads that appear as regular listings.
LocalCircles also identified drip pricing (gradually adding mandatory fees during the checkout process) on 11 of the 26 companies, including Flipkart, Myntra, Cleartrip, MakeMyTrip, BigBasket, Zomato and Blinkit, among others. The organisation said that many platforms appear to misunderstand what qualifies as drip pricing, which has led to incomplete corrections.
Trust Can Erode Due To Gap Between Declarations And User Experience
Sachin Taparia, Founder of LocalCircles, said that the problem begins with the absence of any verification. “Our understanding is that CCPA is wanting that companies submit a self-declaration at the earliest. However, there is no cross checking of claims that is being done by the CCPA, and as a result the companies are not being as thorough with their dark-pattern detection and resolution,” he said.
Taparia added that discrepancies between declarations and user experience could harm trust. “LocalCircles has found dark patterns on 21 of the 26 platforms submitting self-declarations. If this exercise is not done with high accuracy, both platforms doing so and CCPA could see consumer trust being impacted,” he said.
Importantly, Dutta echoed this concern, saying that the absence of penalties or reputation-related consequences allows companies to self-declare compliance while keeping revenue-generating patterns intact. He described the current process as “more an administrative formality [rather] than a behaviour-changing regulatory tool”.
Why This Matters
The gap between self-declarations and independent audits in the true sense of the word brings the real enforcement question into focus. What should the next phase of regulation look like?
In this context, Dutta said that regulators need to move beyond self-certifications and mandate detailed user experience (UX) audit reports that map every user journey, including pop-ups, onboarding, search, checkout, cancellations and returns.
He explained that regulators should reinforce this by demanding substantive evidence instead of brief compliance letters. This evidence can include screenshots and screen recordings of key flows, version histories that show how an interface changed over time, and product design documents or A/B testing results that reveal why specific nudges were introduced. To explain, A/B testing is essentially a method for comparing two versions of something to see which one performs better.
Furthermore, Dutta noted that platforms already collect extensive data on user complaints and drop-off points, which can help identify harmful or confusing design choices. He also said that independent third-party attestations, similar to security or accessibility audits, can provide a credible external check and increase the cost of non-compliance.
Multiple Annual Audits For Apps that Change Interface Frequently
Notably, Dutta stressed that most dark pattern categories appear across e-commerce, quick commerce and Direct-to-Consumer (D2C) websites, which means regulators can create a baseline audit standard that works across sectors instead of relying on platform-specific interpretations. He also suggested that audits should occur at least once a year, and companies that frequently modify their interfaces may need to report two or three times annually.
The larger concern now is whether the CCPA plans to move toward such a structured framework. Without independent verification and clear audit expectations, companies can continue declaring compliance even when manipulative designs remain embedded in their interfaces.
(Published in Medianama)
admin
July 8, 2024
Sharleen D’Souza, Business Standard
Mumbai, 7 July 2024
In 2023, after more than two years of development and testing, Mondelez India launched a version of Bournvita that delivers about half the recommended daily allowance of key micronutrients for children, including iron, iodine, and zinc, as well as vitamins A, C and D. All this while having 15 per cent less added sugar.
“Prior to this and around two years ago we also introduced Bournvita 50 per cent less sugar variant to provide an option for consumers. We have made adaptations to our portfolio products like Bournvita biscuits, which now have 15 per cent less sugar, and our most loved Oreo chocolate variant has also seen a 5 per cent decrease in sugar content,” the company said in an email.
This drive is not confined to Mondelez. Other multinational companies, too, such as Coca-Cola, PepsiCo, and Nestle India, have been working on bringing down the sugar, salt, and sodium content. They could be patting themselves on the back for doing this. Not only has the Indian consumer become more health conscious than ever — with all the talk going around that salt and sugar are two of the monsters in your kitchen (the third being maida) — but also the country’s food regulator has swung into action.
On Saturday, the Food Safety and Standards Authority of India (FSSAI) approved a proposal that information about the sugar, salt and saturated fat content on labels of packaged foods and beverages should be bolder and bigger. “Along with empowering consumers to make healthier choices, the amendment will also contribute towards efforts to combat the rise of noncommunicable diseases and promote public health and wellbeing,” the FSSAI said in a statement.
Earlier, the regulator advised ecommerce platforms to ensure that dairy-, cereal-, and maltbased beverage mixes were not available under the “health drinks” or “energy drinks” categories. The recommended sugar intake is 20 grams a day for adults and 25 grams a day for those below 18. Not more than 5 to 10 per cent of a person’s total energy intake should come from sugar. Children under two are not supposed to consume any added sugar. However, these guidelines are often breached because people tend to consume packaged foods.
Therefore, experts and activists have been calling for a different labelling, which would announce out loud what lies inside.
Eating right, drinking right
Some multinationals had already been working on reducing the salt and sugar content. For instance, Coca-Cola removed more than 900,000 tonnes of added sugar globally since 2017, and 19 of its top 20 brands offer reduced-sugar or zero-sugar options. In India, Coca-Cola’s Minute Maid Honey Infused drinks offer added dietary fibre for healthy digestion in three flavours.
“In 2022, approximately 68 per cent of our global beverage portfolio contained less than 100 calories per 12-ounce serving (350 ml), with 246 low- or no-sugar options launched,” Coca-Cola India said in a statement to Business Standard.
The company added that it prioritised transparency by placing calorie information on the front of all its packaging worldwide and did not market its products directly to children under 13.
Nestle India joined the FSSAI’s Eat Right movement and signed the pledge to reduce an average of 6 per cent added sugar, 10 per cent salt, and 2.5 per cent fat in its relevant product categories. “The company has achieved these commitments,” it said.
Varun Beverages, PepsiCo’s India bottler, told its investors on a conference call that its gross margins improved significantly, rising by 385 basis points to 56.3 per cent — and sugar had a role to play in it.
“This increase was largely driven by our focus on reducing sugar content and the light-weighting packaging material, incidentally, also meeting our sustainability initiatives along with the benefits from reduced PET prices which contributed to this improvement,” Raj Pal Gandhi, chief financial officer of Varun Beverages, said on the investor call.
Approximately 46 per cent of the company’s reconsolidated sales volumes, he said, came from low-sugar or no-sugar products. The no- or less-sugar trend is working for the company as it optimises its cost structure and enhances its overall efficiency.
“These efforts have had a tangible impact on our financial performance with EBITDA increasing by 23.9 per cent to the level of Rs. 988.76 crore year-on-year, and the Ebitda margin improving by 240 basis points to the level of 22.9 per cent in quarter one of 2024 (January-March),” Gandhi said. Ebitda, a widely accepted benchmark of profitability, is short for earnings before interest, tax, depreciation, and amortisation.
“So, we are developing more and more — Gatorade, we mentioned a new launch which PepsiCo has given us formulation with zero sugar. So, effort is there, and constant effort is there to reduce the sugar content,” Gandhi said. PepsiCo India said in an earlier statement it had initiated trials of a blend of sunflower oil and palmolein oil in certain parts of its portfolio last year, thus becoming one of the few players in the food industry in India to do so.
Rush of junk
Experts say the standards for food and beverages vary across the world and India should have its own. “There should be thresholds for healthy and unhealthy and, in my view, this should be labelled boldly on the front of the pack,” says Arun Gupta, convener, Nutrition Advocacy for Public Interest (NAPi), a think tank.
A report titled The Junk Rush, jointly brought out by the Breastfeeding Promotion Network of India and NAPi, said: “India faces a severe public health crisis of obesity and diabetes.” In 2022, a group of public health experts, consumers, lawyers, and patient groups had called upon the government of India to check the soaring consumption of junk food among the country’s youth.
“Certain countries are more stringent than others. Even global brands have the same product, but the ingredients differ across countries and continents,” says Devangshu Dutta, founder of Third Eyesight. He explains that India still has some road to travel on food safety, alleging that some ingredients benefit companies more — such as by providing a longer shelf life — than the consumer.
“The Indian regulator is still very new to the game. If you look at processed foods, it is a newer market and the regulator needs to pick-up pace,” Dutta says.
On Saturday, the FSSAI picked up pace.
(Published in Business Standard)
admin
July 28, 2023
Manu Balachandran, Forbes India
July 28, 2023
Revant Himatsingka doesn’t despise junk food.
The 31-year-old firmly believes that those who consume it also know the perils and long-term risks associated with it. From obesity to heart disease and diabetes, junk food is often counted as a more serious threat to life than even smoking according to some studies. “Most people who consume Coke and cigarettes know they are bad for you and consume them,” Himatsingka says.
Himatsingka, however, has a problem with junk food masquerading as healthy. That’s why over the past few months he has been busy calling out its makers, and in the process taking on some of the world’s biggest FMCG behemoths.
Since April this year, Himatsingka, through his social media profile, Foodpharmer, claims to have taken on almost all the FMCG companies in India, whose products he has reviewed, and in the process has been swamped with lawsuits. Himatsingka has a following of half a million followers on Instagram.
“Food is probably 60-70 percent of what shapes our health,” Himatsingka told Forbes India over a telephone call. “And what is shaping our food today is packaged food, which is very different from what our grandparents grew up eating. Most packaged food is just selling junk and they’re marketing it as healthy. This happens even more in relatively poorer countries.”
Himatsingka began his war against fake claims with a video about Bournvita, made by confectionary maker Mondelez. That video, critiquing the children’s drink for its excessive use of sugar, was shared across social media and on WhatsApp. Himatsingka poked fun at Bournvita’s tagline Tayyari Jeet Ki (preparing for victory), instead suggesting that Bournvita was preparing children for diabetes.
He listed out all the ingredients in Bournvita, debunked claims that the drink is healthy, and remarked that half of a package of Bournvita is sugar, and [it] even contains cancer-causing ingredients.
Trouble soon followed. Mondelez sent Himatsingka a legal notice asking him to take down the video within 24 hours. Coincidentally, the notice came to him on the last day of his notice period at McKinsey where he had been working as a consultant. Unfortunately for Mondelez, the video continues to be in circulation, more so across WhatsApp. Himatsingka took down the video and even issued a statement saying that he had no interest or resources to take on the company in any court cases.
“Most people have Coke once a week,” Himatsingka says. “But people have Bournvita twice a day. So you end up having 14 [servings of] Bournvita in a week. So, the net impact of Bournvita is probably worse than that of Coke.”
“As a growing market, India is potentially a natural “dumping ground” for poor products and processes that have been used by prominent brands in other markets,” Devangshu Dutta, the founder and CEO of management consultancy firm Third Eyesight says. “It is incumbent upon Indian customers to be diligent, picking up cues not only from Indian consumer-activists and but also their counterparts in the developed economies.”
From Kolkata to New York and back
Himatsingka grew up in an upper-middle-class household, with a homemaker mother and a father running his own business in Kolkata.
After his schooling, Himatsingka went to New York to study finance at the New York University’s NYU Stern School of Business where he graduated in finance. For a year after that he worked with a bank in the US. At 22, he ventured out into writing a book, Selfienomics, a self-help comedy book focusing on managing finances, health, religion, death, starting a business, and even completing projects on time.
“I wrote one chapter on how to read a food label even then,” Himatsingka says. “Back then, and even now I believe that it is the most important skill in the 21st century.” While he did secure admission into the illustrious IIM Bangalore, Himatsingka turned it down, instead focussing on his book.
By 2018, Himatsingka went to do an MBA at Wharton and followed it up with a course in nutrition, while also starting work at McKinsey as a consultant. “As a consultant, you work to solve business problems and you try to structure solutions,” Himatsingka says. “We focus on our career when it comes to structuring solutions and being data driven. But I try to extrapolate that into life. In life, one of our most important aspects is health.”
Himatsingka was also concerned by the growing link between cancer and heart diseases to packaged and processed food. In 2019, a study published in the British Medical Journal (BMJ) suggested a possible link between “ultra-processed” foods and cancer. The study defined ultra-processed foods as those lacking vitamins and fibre, which also contain high levels of sugar, fat, and salt. Such ultra-processed food, the study noted, represents as much as half of the daily energy intake in several developed countries.
“This is such a big problem and no one is talking about it,” Himatsingka says. “No one is trying to solve it. So, I thought, I wanted to do something in this space.”
That meant, Himatsingka, who by his own account was making very good money in the US, decided it was time to come back home, and try and do something around awareness. “I’m very social impact driven,” Himatsingka says. “April 1st is when I made the Bournvita video. I made a video showcasing how Bournvita was falsely labelling itself. Their label showed that you get stronger bones and muscles. Then I got a legal notice from Bournvita asking me to take down the video in 24 hours.”
The idea for the Bournvita video, Himatsingka says, came from his concern that a product like Coke had become the face of obesity and junk food, while many others were marketing themselves as healthy, without it being so.
Mondelez, the makers of Bournvita soon retorted that the drink contains nutrients such as Vitamin A, C, D, iron, zinc and copper that help build immunity and have been part of its formulation for 70 years. It also said that every serve of Bournvita has 7.5 grams of added sugar, much less than the recommended limit for children.
imatsingka though found support from unexpected quarters. The Nutrition Advocacy in Public Interest India (NAPi) a think tank comprising independent experts in epidemiology, human nutrition, community nutrition and paediatrics, medical education, administration, and management, issued a statement supporting Himatsingka.
“The food product Bournvita falls under the ultra-processed food (UPF) category based on its ingredients list,” NAPi said in a statement. “This industrial formulation is inherently harmful. There is enough scientific evidence present in the public domain pertaining to the negative impact of increasing consumption of UPFs on human health, which include several chronic diseases such as obesity, diabetes, cardiovascular disease, cancer, and depression (Non-Communicable Diseases-NCDs).”
The National Commission for Protection of Child Rights (NCPCR) also issued a notice to Mondelez asking the company to review and withdraw all misleading advertisements, packaging, and labels. The NCPCR is a statutory body to protect child rights.
Fighting it out now
Personally, for Himatsingka, the pushback from Mondelez couldn’t have come at a worse time. “I had just quit my job. And my family was asking me what I was trying to do with my life. They said ‘you had such a good job, you left all of that, now you are getting into a legal fight’,” Himatsingka says. “So I removed the video as they asked me to. And that got even more attention.”
Since then, Himatsingka has been actively taking on FMCG companies and their products in the country, ranging from ketchup, and chyawanprash to juices and bread among others. Himatsingka recounts having received legal notices from Dabur and even been asked to remove a video by Sting Energy, owned by PepsiCo.
He says his strength, however, comes from many parents who have reached out to him and are thanking his efforts for making them aware of the importance of reading labels. “People are reading labels for the first time and have now started figuring that many of the products are not that healthy,” Himatsingka says.
However, the pressure of the job continues to be heavy. “There is a lot of pressure,” the 31-year-old says. “These companies send legal notices and I have no idea how to deal with it. These are very technical and very dense documents, where they analyse each line and write a paragraph on each line. I once got a 300-page document from one company and they were asking me for a few crores. It’s strenuous.”
What lies ahead?
For now, the 31-year-old says his focus remains steadfast on raising awareness around food.
“Because of the Bournvita controversy, the rollover impact is that all the other companies are also going to get scared now to falsely market themselves,” Himatsingka says. “I cannot think of a human problem that is relatively easy to solve than nutrition labels and it creates massive impact.”
A few weeks ago, Himatsingka raised awareness about the growing consumption of bread in India and how most makers of bread who sell whole wheat or brown bread use more maida, which has less fiber, and is unhealthy. He had also called out juice makers for their use of sugar by comparing various mango juices available in the country.
“When a movie comes out, there are reviews and I can openly say whether I liked a movie or not,” Himatsingka says. “So why can’t I say the same about a food product? I’m just unboxing a product and saying what is there inside it. So I don’t think I’m legally wrong. They can ask me for whatever money they want. But I don’t think they can win on that.”
Along the way, he says he has also seen positive changes in companies. For instance, Himatsingka made a video on ketchup and explained how Maggi Rich Tomato Ketchup has more sugar than tomato in its ingredients. “Last month, they (Nestle) announced that they’re changing the recipe,” Himatsingka says. “They’re reducing their sugar content and they are going to have more tomatoes than sugar. One tiny change like that has such a major impact on the large scale.”
Experts agree that the growing scrutiny about ingredients is certain to give FMCG majors sleepless nights. “Given that food has a disproportionate share in our spend, an enormous impact on our health as well as a tremendous ecological footprint, it is only natural for consumers to question the composition, the origins, and the overall impact of the food that is being sold by leading brands,” says Dutta of Third Eyesight. “Over the last several decades, packaged food has become laden with synthetic flavouring, colouring, and shelf-life-extending chemicals, which are being called into question by activists through blogs and social media. On several occasions, prominent companies are forced to change their product composition or, at the very least, admit to the health-negative implications of their ingredients.”
Meanwhile, over the past three or four weeks, Himatsingka says he hasn’t been flooded with lawsuits. That’s partly because he has become quite careful about how he words his statements, instead focusing only on the merits of his argument.
“There are millions of problems in the world. But most of the problems are very hard to solve, like air pollution. But teaching people how to read a food label is easy. I feel learning how to read a food label is more important than coding in the 21st century, where most of what we’re eating is processed or packaged.”
Indeed, the fight is long. And Himatsingka is only gearing up for more.
(Published in Forbes India)
Devangshu Dutta
December 30, 2009
There’s been a lively debate on Retailwire.com initiated by Tom Ryan (Managing Editor), and prompted by an article in the Washington Post about how consumers are literally taking matters in their own hands and testing toys and domestic items for the presence of toxic substances.
Some of the commentators feel that this is going too far and could create waves of unnecessary panic, that consumers and consumer advocacy groups do not have the necessary expertise nor a balanced judgement, that it is a job for the government agencies. Others support the move and say that such moves are absolutely in order.
In my opinion, despite good intentions on the retailer’s part and the humongous bureaucracy in the supply chain, if product safety compliance is incomplete and if consumers feel insecure, then they will provide the wake-up call any which way they can.
We may decry the paranoia, but let’s also consider the increase and concentration of risk in recent years due to factors such as:
However the industry may feel about it, I think consumer advocates have the steering wheel on this one. Unless government outlaws ‘unapproved’ testing…but I wonder how palatable that would be, politically speaking.
Here’s the original article from the Washington Post.
And the discussion on Retailwire.com is here (needs a free sign-up).
admin
January 1, 2006
Thanks for visiting Third Eyesight’s blog. We hope you will find information here that will be useful for you in your business or for your studies. Please share the blog links with your friends, co-workers and business associates: you can use the social bookmarking tools, or just copy and paste the URL from the address bar above. Do encourage everyone to explore the Third Eyesight blog.
While we share this content freely, please keep in mind that we do like to be acknowledged if someone re-uses our content. So if you quote material from our website, please ensure that you clearly and unambiguously credit Third Eyesight and the website page URL as the source.
If you want to re-publish our content a print or online publication, please send an email on “services [at] thirdeyesight [dot] in” or leave us a message here: CONTACT US.
