Editing Mark Zuckerberg (section)

==Impact on consumer protection==
Mark Zuckerberg has significantly influenced consumer rights, both positively and negatively. His decisions have shaped digital privacy, data control, competition, and transparency, often sparking regulatory and public backlash.
*Data privacy and surveillance
**Negative: Facebook (now Meta) has faced numerous scandals involving unauthorized data collection, including Cambridge Analytica (2018), where 87 million users’ data was harvested without consent.<ref>{{Cite news |last=Cadwalladr |first=Carole |last2=Graham-Harrison |first2=Emma |date=March 17, 2018 |title=Revealed: 50 million Facebook profiles harvested for Cambridge Analytica in major data breach |url=https://www.theguardian.com/news/2018/mar/17/cambridge-analytica-facebook-influence-us-election |work=The Guardian}}</ref>
**Positive: Meta introduced privacy tools and supported GDPR compliance in the EU, after the scandals.
*Algorithmic manipulation and mental health concerns
**Negative: Studies revealed that Meta’s algorithms promoted harmful content, affecting mental health and spreading misinformation.<ref name=":6">{{Cite news |last=Wells |first=Georgia |last2=Horwitz |first2=Jeff |last3=Seetharaman |first3=Deepa |date=September 14, 2021 |title=Facebook Knows Instagram Is Toxic for Teen Girls, Company Documents Show |url=https://www.wsj.com/articles/facebook-knows-instagram-is-toxic-for-teen-girls-company-documents-show-11631620739 |work=The Wall Street Journal}}</ref>
**Positive: Meta has since introduced wellbeing features, such as screen time limits and content warnings.
*Monopoly power and reduced consumer choice
**Negative: Meta’s acquisitions of Instagram and WhatsApp led to antitrust lawsuits, limiting competition and consumer alternatives.<ref>{{Cite web |date=December 9, 2020 |title=FTC Sues Facebook for Illegal Monopolization |url=https://www.ftc.gov/news-events/news/press-releases/2020/12/ftc-sues-facebook-illegal-monopolization |website=Federal Trade Commission}}</ref>
**Positive: Some argue Meta’s ecosystem (Facebook, Instagram, WhatsApp) provides convenience through integrated services.{{Citation needed|reason=Who is arguing this?}}
*Transparency and accountability
**Negative: Facebook historically resisted transparency, including hiding internal research on harms.<ref name=":6" />
**Positive: Meta now publishes quarterly transparency reports on content moderation and government requests.<ref>{{Cite web |title=Transparency Center |url=https://transparency.fb.com/ |website=transparency.fb.com}}</ref>
*Ad targeting and consumer exploitation
**Negative: Facebook’s micro-targeting has been criticized for enabling discriminatory ads <ref>{{Cite news |last=Angwin |first=Julia |last2=Parris Jr. |first2=Terry |date=October 28, 2016 |title=Facebook Lets Advertisers Exclude Users by Race |url=https://www.propublica.org/article/facebook-lets-advertisers-exclude-users-by-race |work=ProPublica}}</ref> and exploiting user behavior.
**Positive: Meta has restricted some ad-targeting categories (e.g., race, religion) in response to criticism.
The impact Mark and Meta have had on consumer rights is mixed. Meta has introduced some privacy and transparency improvements, but Zuckerberg's history of data exploitation, monopolistic behavior, and algorithmic harms has significantly weakened consumer trust. Regulatory pressure continues to shape Meta’s policies, but critics argue that more systemic changes are needed.