Facebook CEO Mark Zuckerberg published an op-ed in the Washington Post responding to users' privacy complaints and laying out Facebook's plan to offer simplified privacy settings.
"Our intention was to give you lots of granular controls; but that may not have been what many of you wanted," Zuckerberg wrote in the op-ed, titled "From Facebook, Answering Privacy Concerns With New Settings. "We just missed the mark."
Zuckerberg offered details on Facebook's plan to offer users simpler privacy controls:
In the coming weeks, we will add privacy controls that are much simpler to use. We will also give you an easy way to turn off all third-party services. We are working hard to make these changes available as soon as possible. We hope you'll be pleased with the result of our work and, as always, we'll be eager to get your feedback.
(Facebook's chief of public policy, Tim Sparapani, referenced these simplified options in an earlier interview)
Interestingly, Zuckerberg uses the word "privacy" only once in the entire post ("We will add privacy controls that are much simpler to use").
The new settings may appease some, but as All Things D's Peter Kafka argues, the company's solution still pushes its users to share more.
Kafka writes, "Zuckerberg never promises the move Facebook would make if it wanted users to keep their information truly private: Make 'private' the default setting, and make all sharing options 'opt-in.'"
Whereas the op-ed consisted mostly of "standard patter about Facebook's mission,"/a> the Facebook CEO was more candid about his company's privacy blunders in an email sent to Robert Scoble.
"I know we've made a bunch of mistakes," Zuckerberg wrote. "My hope at the end of this is that the service ends up in a better place and that people understand that our intentions are in the right place and we respond to the feedback from the people we serve."
"I want to make sure we get this stuff right this time," he added. (Read the full letter here)
Many have been waiting for Zuckerberg to respond to the backlash over his site's privacy changes. But does the op-ed hit its mark? What should he have said that he didn't? What are you glad to have heard? Tell us your reaction in the comments section below.
More on Facebook and privacy: