Many consumers are aware their information is being scooped up and sold to the highest bidder on Facebook and Google. If they are not, I support more thorough and approachable information disclosure mandates. Most consumers don't care or at least the benefits of Facebook outweigh the cost as far as they see it. That's a calculated market decision.

I, myself do not have a Facebook, Instagram, WhatsApp, WhateverZuckBuysNext account because Facebook is a bad company and I don't wish to give it a dollar. When WhatsApp decided to merge Facebook and WhatsApp user data, consumers reacted by switching to Signal, a more equitable competitor. Facebook then had to placate them, at least temporarily. This is how conscious consumption works and in a capitalist economy transactions and boycotts are one of the purist ways to show your approval or disapproval of a company's products, services and behavior. It punishes bad actors in their wallets and rewards good ones in theirs instead.

I am 100% in favor of mandated information disclosure laws. I think consumers cannot make a voluntary and informed market decision if they don't have adequate information. Things like nutritional values, ingredients lists, explicitly enumerated contracts, hazards, precautions, demarcated place of product origin, assembly and material origin etc. etc. These are the tools with which consumers can make market decisions.

We live in a society where this information disclosure is obviously inadequate but consumers are also part of the equation and should be more vigilant and aware of their part in this dance.

I don't think the only two options are between a heavily regulated corporate hegemony (with consumer safeguards) and pro-corporate monopolist authoritarianism. We can do better but people need to do better too.