Editor’s note: The difference between anecdotes and data in congestion pricing and policing

It’s been about a week since congestion pricing went into effect, and people are eager to know whether it's working. Journalists have fanned out across New York City to ask commuters whether it feels like Midtown traffic has decreased and if the subways seem more crowded. Preliminary data shows river crossing travel times down 30% and more modest gains within the congestion pricing zone. But we won’t truly know the program’s impacts until we’ve collected and analyzed months’ worth of comprehensive data. There’s a reason Gov. Kathy Hochul said she will wait until next year to declare congestion pricing a success or failure.

Anecdotal evidence can be even more misleading when it comes to public safety. Despite coverage of random violent incidents on the subways, the latest data shows that the subways are now safer than they have been in years. New York City Police Department Commissioner Jessica Tisch announced last week that the number of incidents on the subway actually fell last year – though she still said she would send 200 additional police officers into the subway system to address people’s fears.

The problem with focusing on sensationalist and misleading anecdotes over actual data is that it leads to support for policies that are unnecessary or even counterproductive. People who wrongly believe that every subway ride comes with a real chance of being set on fire will demand that more cops be deployed on subway cars or just refuse to take the train, even when driving in Manhattan is more dangerous, not to mention more expensive.