Yes it is. However in general a CEO has to do it "for shareholder benefit" as the shareholders could vote the CEO out, this it is useful for a CEO to blame decision on the need to get a return for shareholders. Zuckerberg has the shares set up so that shareholders have no voting rights, they cannot get rid of him. He could forego some profits by introducing some level of customer privacy and he would be safe from being replaced. That he doesn't means that he himself must take all responsibility for pissing on users privacy.