Earlier this week, Zuckerberg emerged largely unscathed after facing hours of questioning from USA lawmakers on how the personal information of several million Facebook users might have been improperly shared with political consultancy Cambridge Analytica.
"Yes or no", asked Sen. Facebook would argue that a free, personalized user experience is the value you get in exchange for them taking your data from you. "We don't do that".
There's also the possibility that legislation meant to give users more control over their data and privacy could end up benefiting a more established platform like Facebook and handicapping new services trying to build an audience and a business.
As Axios notes, of the politicians who didn't simply beg Zuckerberg to visit their counties with money and fiber cables, many used their time to grandstand about their favorite partisan political issues - Facebook-related or not. Zuckerberg said the European standard, General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR), to come into effect on May 25, was more stringent than what was now in place at Facebook and suggested it could serve as a rough model for USA rules in the future.More news: Rolls-Royce to step up inspections of Trent 1000 engines
For all of Zuckerberg's claims that Facebook users own their data, users - and non-users - have no way of determining the full trove of data that the company stores on an individual. Zuckerberg has told lawmakers that Facebook is still investigating what happened in the past with data breaches, and will continue to inform users of their rights and what tools are available to them.
The interesting question, however, is whether Facebook itself plans to make use of this, and here Mr Zuckerberg was less than entirely candid or open. All the same, the level of questioning suggests that those in Congress lack in some cases even a basic understanding of how Facebook - or online services more broadly - work.
"When it comes to the stuff that prompted this discussion, the Cambridge Analytical aggregate IQ stuff, I do think we need regulation but I don't think it's directed at Facebook, I think it's directed at political parties and their operatives who are, at least in Canada, outside the scope of any privacy regulation".
"Yesterday when we talked, I gave the relatively harmless example that I'm communicating with my friends on Facebook and indicate that I love a certain kind of chocolate".More news: Michigan State president, board faced jeers, boos during raucous meeting
Fraser said Facebook's 2.2 billion users worldwide should have an expectation of privacy.
But when asked whether Facebook would commit to minimizing user data collection as much as possible, he said: "This is a complex issue that deserves more than a one-word answer".
In the archive is a variety of information that isn't surprising to find - when a user has logged into Facebook, their posts and messages. Cambridge Analytica has disputed that figure.
Facebook and Britain's Information Commissioner's Office is still investigating the Cambridge Analytica brief. Shouldn't owners of the data be compensated for its use?More news: Priyanka Chopra's new Hollywood movie 'A Kid Like Jake' trailer is here
Zuckerberg clearly admitted to mistakes and took responsibility.