Why we should all be skeptical of Mark Zuckerberg’s new commitment to privacy

Image: Win McNamee / Getty Images

Mark Zuckerberg just revealed plans to bring about what could be one of the most significant changes in Facebook’s history. 

In an over 3,000 word post on his Facebook page, the CEO laid out his vision for Facebook’s future: one that would transform the social network into a “privacy-focused” platform that emphasizes encryption and disappearing content. 

It’s a philosophical shift that would have significant implications for how Facebook’s billions of users use its services. But if the last 15 years of Facebook have taught us anything, it’s that we shouldn’t take Zuckerberg’s words at face value. 

Yes, big changes are coming. And yes, some of those changes — like making end-to-end encryption more widespread — have long been requested by privacy advocates. But that doesn’t mean Zuckerberg isn’t motivated by the same ideals.  

For one, the timing of Zuckerberg’s sudden change of heart is extraordinarily convenient. Facebook is currently staring down the barrel of a massive FTC fine for privacy violations in the wake of Cambridge Analytica. The Washington Post has reported the fine will be a “record-setting” amount that could end up costing Facebook billions of dollars. 

And, sure, Zuckerberg’s promises to remake Facebook into some kind of Facebook Coin-fueled privacy haven likely won’t matter much when the FTC comes knocking, but it will almost certainly help the company navigate the inevitable PR crisis when “Facebook” and “record FTC fine” are splashed across front pages.

The FTC fine isn’t the only government action Facebook has to worry about. The company is also dealing with the very real prospect of increased regulation from officials in the United States and Europe. One area of concern to lawmakers is Facebook’s control over several of the most popular messaging apps in the world make it a monopoly.

Zuckerberg faced some uncomfortable questions from Congress over exactly this issue last year.  (unsurprisingly, he didn’t have a very good answer when asked directly if Facebook was a monopoly). By blurring the lines between WhatsApp and Instagram and Messenger, Facebook can claim that it’s all really just one service, not independent entities that can be easily separated. 

Finally, we don’t even need to look that far to find examples of Zuckerberg promising to clean up Facebook’s data privacy issues as a way of trying to eke out a PR win. It’s hardly been a year since Zuck took the stage at F8 and promised a “clear history” tool, which would prevent Facebook from tracking your activity and targeting you with ads. 

Ten months later, not only is there no sign of “clear history,” but recent reporting from BuzzFeed proves what many had long suspected: the tool was simply a way for Zuckerberg to save face during the company’s worst public relations crisis in recent memory. The proposed tool was “barely an idea” at the time. (Facebook told Recode it expects to start testing the feature this spring.)

And that’s just one feature. Who knows how long it will take to retool Facebook’s infrastructure —something Zuckerberg has said will be a years-long effort — and what kind of tradeoffs will be made between now and then?

But, hey, this new “privacy-focused” narrative is, at least, a lot more convenient until then.